skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Because you go on to emphasize the jealousy explanation with your Uber for Dogs example. Clearly, you gave that explanation more thought and weight.
Understanding how Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies work in general doesn't make them suddenly have more value. I really wish supporters would stop parroting the "if you only understood you would see how good of an investment this is" argument.

Just because you read the white paper and spend 20 hours a day refreshing news alerts for bitcoin doesn't make your investment a good one.

I agree this article doesn't add anything to the discussion. If anything, Bloomberg is making out by selling the proverbial shovels around here by fueling the hype machine.
How's ski town life? We're looking at moving to the mountains, not sure what it's like never having lived there full-time before.
> Patents allow companies to do that

Patents allow a single "blocking" patent to extract monopoly revenues over an entire area of technology. http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2017/10/11/qualcomm-antirust-war-p...
Will the Meltdown fix impact the performance of your games?
In Europe it's cheaper[xx] to leave car driving around (indefinitely on a roundabout etc) than to (short-term) park in the cities or at airports.

[xx]

1h city driving = 20km

fuel @ €10/100km

driving = €2

parking = €3-€3.50

EVs would be <€1/h
Mysterium Network: Updates on Technical Progress and HR
ledgerx
>In the case of HEVC, which is a joint effort by the ITU and ISO, it’s a straightforward exchange of technology for money.

Have you been living in a cave for last year ? HEVC licensing is an absolute mess with at least 3 different entities with which you have to settle licensing terms.

>and in both cases the consortium members expect some return on their investment.

The return on investment here is saving the cost of royalties and being in control of the development of the codec which will only become increasingly important in your business.
A Chip off the Monolith
Bitcoin does not represent all digital currency.

Bitcoin will die, crypto currency will survive.
But he does seem to have an uncanny ability to think rationally, to recognize when the broad market doesn't, and to capitalize on this difference.
In reality, we're ignoring most of it due to the overall sentiment.
Vitamin D wiki

https://www.vitamindwiki.com/VitaminDWiki
JS async/await util featuring abortion, TCO and fast synchronous execution
Yet at the end of the day, Bitcoin is simply a store of value, just like any currency. And Buffet has plenty of experience with handling stores of value.

Bitcoin's recent exponential growth screams "bubble" for anyone who knows what to watch for.
> Google Tulip mania.

People involved in cryptocurrencies hear this idiotic comparison all the time.

By the way, the tulip mania was a myth. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/there-never-was-real-...
Probably because you negate it with “even if they could.”
Have you had your levels checked by your doctor? My doctor said I was low for a year, as they came up I started sleeping much better -- can't see many other differences.
Ahh yes, the "anyone who doesn't think Bitcoin is going to be worth more than all of the wealth currently held on Earth, is just jealous that they missed out" argument.

I find this particularly amusing when it's directed at people who have been involved with Bitcoin from the very beginning.
What a US-centric mindset, bitcoin doesn't give a shit about US, the volume is low in US, I would tell you a use, replace the dollar as a global reserve currency, which is why the the fed can print money like crazy and export inflation in the whole world, another thing you can't do with money is save on medium term.
I've heard smart people say bitcoin will plummet because it has no intrinsic value. Well of course it doesn't! It's a currency. Currencies are an abstraction for value.

Sure, right now bitcoin is not a good day-to-day currency because of high transaction fees and slow verification speeds. But there are new altcoins that have solved both of these, that exist right now!

The real win for cryptocurrencies, in my opinion, is that it's public-key internet money, while debit cards are private-key internet money. With debit cards, you have to give someone your private key (16 digit combo+exp date+security code) in order to transact. Giving away your private key is prone to fraud, and the fraud-protection mechanism is to give a centralized authority access to everything you've ever purchased, and they look for anything "suspicious". On the other hand, with public-key money, when you give someone funds, there's no risk of them exposing you to fraud or unwanted transactions afterwards. Even though I understood the public-key mechanism for bitcoin early on, I didn't realize the full implications for the financial system until recently.
Do you think that once bitcoin collapses under its own weight and investors lose a ton of money the general public is going to trust another cryptocurrency?
I'd argue that's a lag in price, though. Even if Target doesn't lower their prices, as self-checkouts get more and more ubiquitous (I mean, they kind of have, but they aren't necessarily the standard), if a Target competitor wants to lower their prices to steal customers it's now easier to do so because they're making more money as well. The lack of benefit to the consumer is due to the lack of competition, but with adequate competition this technology would definitely bring down prices.
Buffett said he didn't want to invest in IT because he didn't understand it enough, but it also lead him to never say it was going to fail. Here it's different, he specifically points out that he thinks it will fail.

You may disagree with his point of view, but to dismiss his input as absolutely irrelevant is out of touch, so is claiming he "doesn't add anything of value to the discussion": his opinion, by value of who he is and his experience, is value to the discussion in a field that is still about speculation and high risk investment.

I find it interesting how many people on here like to eat up the words of most mogul and take it as semi gospel, then balks when one of them goes against one of their pet love thing. This is not specific of cryptocurrencies, although due to their "get rich quick" attributes these tend to make it even stronger. Just goes to show how people are the same everywhere, even (hell, especially) the "more informed".

I don't personally believe in his point of view, I think while all current cryptocurrencies are going to fail or at least become a small sideshow especially the big names ones, the next wave will be smarter in what they try to be. Still, I value his input as much if not more as those of "self proclaimed cryptocurrency experts" who merely happened to have made one good bet. He made a ton more of those.
Since running is largely recreational most runners avoid congested areas on purpose. If this changes it will have to be revisited. Nice strawman though.
I don't get this whole store of value concept. Nothing is a store of value, all there is is investments with varying levels of risk.
All i could focus on was the statement increase of 20% and how ambiguous that statement is whether you are referring to the original percentage or a percentage of that percentage (which is what he meant here).
I can see these headlights going for an easy $500 via non-standard proprietary tech, let alone imagining what service labor will charge...because you know they're going to pull some bullshit like, "due to inherent system complexity, a factory certified technician is required to ensure proper service and calibration".

The keyword seldom is a red herring in that if you have to replace them even once--at $500/ea material + who knows how much in labor--you would have exceeded the lifecycle maintenance cost of a traditional HID setup by roughly an order of magnitude.

Furthmore, headlight housing these days are largely manufactured using polymers which are susceptible to "fogging up" over time, so replacement may not necessarily be driven by DLP failure mode. However, given DLP is essentially MEMS tech and target platforms are subjected to significant vibration and wide operating temperature gamut, I question how MTBF of these chips will be impacted vs. their traditional fixed consumer application over commercial temperature ranges.

This isn't about performance. It's about suckering a market into gold plating a system to achieve IP lockdown--solving a problem that simply doesn't exist. OEMs are already refusing to sell factory service manuals to vehicle owners. This is yet another step in the wrong direction towards a completely unmaintainable vehicle.
> The president of the US leaves the rest of the world in panic when someone will finally declare war with him after yet another tweet.

You know if people are actually in panic over him tweeting, maybe the problem is in those people.

It's like those folks posting pictures of their kids crying when Trump won, saying "my 6 year old is now scared he'll be murdered". Uh, you did that to yourself.
> You could say the same of all Web technologies.

I don’t think CERN was trying to monetize anything. To the extent that web technologies today are driven by companies like Google, then maybe that’s a fair criticism too.

> Do you actually think it would be better to have software patents and royalties on every Web standard?

I don’t think it would necessarily be worse than having web technologies all developed to further the agenda of advertising companies.

> It is always possible to find hidden costs in free products, so what?

The “so what” is that hidden costs are, all else being equal, worse than transparent costs.

> The idea that a Blu-Ray player won't spy on you because the manufacturer paid some royalties is... flawed.

Paying someone up front doesn’t guarantee they won’t try to monetize you indirectly, but not paying someone up front virtually assures that they will. Compare Symbian to Android.
Cryptocurrency is comparable to a tech stock because computers? That's about the extent of what they have in common.
> I understand now why Keith Wesolowski ditched computers and went to work on a ranch

Ha ha! Can't help but think of the Roman emperor Diocletian, who after two decades of a "moderately successful career" decided to leave the office and move to a ranch to grow divine cabbages
I was an early adopter and proponent of BTC, and have made a nice sum of it. But today I have some serious doubts:

1) What I initially found the best feature of BTC (the finite pool) has turned it into a digital gold, and unusable for real day to day transactions imo.

2) The blockchain is too slow, and too expensive.

Now maybe BTC does have a future as digital gold, but not as a medium for transactions in the legal space (imo)
That anybody uses these proprietary "chat apps" for anything baffles me.
A better argument would be to point toward proof of stake or other consensus systems like that used in Ripple. Until there is a more effective method, Proof of work is a highly effective alternative to physical security.

Trying to pass off counterfeit government currency has consequences that involve work by numerous individuals and organizations - and they don't always succeed. Proof of work in a crypto system is effectively successful all of the time, instantly.

The same applies to any form of money and fraudulent activity since the beginning of history. There is always work involved, and the effectiveness of that work has never been greater than with crypto... the consequences of which must be kept in mind - just like existing governments and systems, crypto can be used to control its participants.
How does it "reduce costs" if you still have to support both?

And I can't find how much licensing actual costs for H.264.
I have a lot of friends investing in crypto-currencies recently, and here's the fun thing: most of them are well aware this is a speculative bubble, but it didn't stop them investing. Quite the opposite actually, they believe this is the beginning of the bubble, and they can make a several hundred percent investment in a short timespan. And they are quite right, in every speculative bubble, no value is ever destroyed, it's merely a transfered from some speculators to others, all they need to do is sell at the right time.
1 self checkout terminal is usually not faster than 1 cashier. But 1 cash register is usually replaced with multiple self checkout terminals and then the process is definitely sped up. Mainly due more bandwidth to mitigate slow customer bottlenecks. Especially when the self checkout is the kind where you scan the groceries while shopping and don’t need to re-bag them.
Driver should be moving his/her head slightly to eliminate this phenomena, to change angles of view. Very useful when approaching difficult situation in a moving car. One has to anticipate these effects and try to disturb linearity in movement by changing your car speed non-linearly to alter viewing angles in some situations.

These approaches together it will help driver to much better asses other objects speed and direction of movement and generally it improve one situation awareness.

This is something you can do about it if you dont want to wait for all crossroads to be rebuilt ;-)
Another possibility is that Zuckerberg's plans were destroyed (or at least delayed) by EU ruling[0], so he didn't get what actually expected.

0. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/may/18/facebook-fi...
What is the actual gain to society from requiring a cyclist license? Today, without licenses, police can and do hand out moving violations to cyclists. Today, drivers who have their license revoked or car impounded still find ways to drive cars, at least in the US. The barrier to picking up a new bike after having yours impounded by police is far lower. If it's forcing a baseline requirement for skills and knowledge, well we've already seen how well that's worked out for drivers (most drivers suck at it).

Licensing cyclists seems like a feel good idea to make things "fair". The fact is, things can never be fair between to such disparate classes of vehicles. Can someone explain how a world with licensed cyclists would be fundamentally different than today?
How and where to buy Bitcoin
This is all part of the long-standing "taxation is theft" meme that infected the USA in the late 1970s and early 1980s. There are many reasons we can't have nice things. One such reason is our collective unwillingness to pay for them.
I don't follow the economics on this - while you're staying in a stationary "driverless hotel room", you're tying up machinery (the vehicle bit) that represents a lot more capital investment than a static room. How is that supposed to be cheaper?
Sounds like despite their best efforts, NLP + full automation still has a long way to go. Unless they didn't get the resources they need to push it over the edge?

> That’s because most of the tasks fulfilled by M required people.

> One source familiar with the program estimates M never surpassed 30 percent automation. Last spring, M’s leaders admitted the problems they were trying to solve were more difficult than they’d initially realized.

> But as it became clear that M would always require a sizable workforce of expensive humans, the idea of expanding the service to a broader audience became less viable.
I applaud bloomberg for writing about this.
The more these problems are talked about, hopefully, will result in some for of change.
(The NY Times has done a great job in the NY region shining a light on subways, MTA, see below for stories linked.)

It is always incredibly challenging to have to design solutions ontop of exisiting,immovable, infrastructure and old stubborn corrupt people.

Regarding the article, these statements are absurd.

> K. Jane Williams, deputy administrator of the Federal Transit Administration, sent a curtly worded letter to New York and New Jersey officials that snidely made the deal sound made-up.

> “We consider it unhelpful to reference a nonexistent ‘agreement’ rather than directly address the responsibility for funding a local project where 9 out of 10 passengers are local transit riders,” she wrote.

With New York residents rated 44 out of 50 on Wallet Hub's "2017’s Most & Least Federally Dependent States " state residents being dependent on the federal government, meaning NY residents give more than they get back ( Scale : 1 = giving less and being more dependent on federal funds versus 50 being more independent and giving more than it receives, being less dependent on federal funds[1] ) as well as other nearby states, such as Massachusetts(46), New Jersey(49) and Delaware(50), I find it incredibly irritating for them to make it as if people who rely on that form of transit do not matter especially with transportation being a way to get out of poverty. [2][3]

So much for infrastructure spending....

[1](https://wallethub.com/edu/states-most-least-dependent-on-the...)

[2] (https://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/07/upshot/transportation-eme...)

[3]
(https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2015/05/25/public-transp...)

Regarding Amtrak,the author in my opinion should have explained how the Amtrak works/run. They suffer because they do not have funding, but lack the ability to be forced to innovate because of virtually zero competition.(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amtrak#Controversy)

To understand how Amtrak works, I suggest reading this.
(https://rctom.hbs.org/submission/amtrak-when-political-absur...)

>NY Times on MTA

(https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/07/opinion/nyc-leaders-subwa...)
(https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/03/magazine/subway-new-york-...)
(https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/28/nyregion/new-york-subway-...)
(https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/12/22/nyregion/what...)
(https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/20/nyregion/system-failure-n...)
Interesting, hadn't heard of Mohism before. I'm not looking for more hedonism and I'm fine with the amount of sex I have. I'm talking more about overlooking my health by spending too much time working specifically. It's a startup issue time management issue I think, I (and others like me I guess) keep thinking once things are more stable I'll have more time... but don't want to end up waiting until it's too late.
> Buffett doesn't understand Bitcoin

And Buffett has repeatedly said that it's a bad idea to invest in things you don't understand. He's also known for preferring longer-term investing to short-term speculation.

As for cryptocurrency values, of course they're all quite volatile. Anybody who reads HN is probably aware of this by now. Using them as a long-term store of value without actively managing a portfolio right now would be unwise.

Long-term, however, I expect distributed cryptocurrency will replace centralized fiat currency for most purposes. All it would take is an existing cryptocurrency that actually works well as a currency (not Bitcoin) combined with a financial crisis.
Most software actually is crap.
Ah yes, the half-baked cookie law. Misguided, and never enforced anyway.

I rather enjoyed http://nocookielaw.com/
Atlas incorporates companies in the U.S., and US companies will have a filing obligation for federal taxes and an obligation to pay Delaware franchise tax (which is basically a renewal fee for the company every year).

Whether it is "additional" tax depends on your circumstances, and is a good question to run by an accountant.

I've run US businesses from Japan for ~10 years or so. The net tax rate of doing is not obviously materially higher than just having a Japanese entity and doing everything through it; I'll avoid giving you the full blow-by-blow of why that is true, since it isn't relevant to your circumstances, but the short version is "foreign tax credits" and "social security totalization agreement " (a bilateral treaty).
Google is the one shooting fire first by firing him needlessly
I'm currently at 292 hours on "Binding Of Isaac"[1] in a little over 18 months. I'm not sure he counts as "obsessive".

[1] (PC version; I've probably got 100+ hours on the Vita version as well)
Bitcoin is just a store of value because ownership itself does not produce any profits or dividends, profits require higher demand in the future. No wealth is generated, merely transferred. This is similar to gold, and very different from, say, ownership in a farm, where goods can be consistently generated and sold every year.
Yes, every investment is like that. The sine qua non of an investment is purchasing a productive asset. If you purchase a non-productive asset--that could be hedging, or speculation, or just consumption, but it isn't investing.
The current approach without retained display lists is actually closer to the virtual-DOM diffing approach. i.e.

Without retained display lists:

- build up a display list of the entire scene.
- diff this display list with the previous one to see what areas have changed.
- paint the areas that have changed

With retained display lists:

- keep a list of elements that have changed
- build a display list for part of the screen that have changed elements in them
- merge the new partial display list into the old one
- diff this display list with the previous to see what areas have changed
- paint the areas that have changed
What else are you supposed to use to communicate on a phone? Unauthenticated cleartext SMS?
When a system contains its own representation which describes the system as the intellectual agent pursuing some goals and feeling some feels.

Otherwise all the agency and supposed consciousness comes from outside of the system (e.g. from out empathy) and is not an inherent part of the system.
It's sad they tore down what looked like a beautiful station to build the ugliness that is there now. Hopefully the forever-upcoming Moynihan station will bring some of that back.
I am also of the same mind. I had a project with a friend where we collected data that would fall under this. We were once told that we had to comply with some "order" from CNIL to stop collection, which we just laughed and ignored.

It's a joke that the same government will go ahead and collect info for "protect the public from terrorists" purposes, yet try to constrain a company outside of their jurisdiction from collecting simmilar information with no real mechanism of enforcement.

People really think these technologies are just going to crawl in a ditch somewhere because some eurocrats (and those who've accepted the bread and circus they provide to the public) want to put pen to paper and act as if these are laws of phyisics... next we'll hear madates that all companies around the world must offer affordable privacy in a can™ for the EU chattel.

The more deep packet inspection/filtering of non complient sites, the more resilient the web will become, so I look forward to the continued escalation.
> Fully compliant with all major buzzwords.

It's missing the "blockchain" and "cryptocurrency" buzzwords.
From looking at the paper [1], the basic mitigation seems to be that the group admin that adds someone to the group sends the "add this account to the group" message to all group members end-to-end encrypted.

In Signal, apparently some malicious users that are not a group member (such as a former group member) could add users to a group. In Threema and WhatsApp, a malicious server can add further users, but Threema has apparently fixed that already.

[1] https://eprint.iacr.org/2017/713.pdf
Seems to use tls-sni-01. This is my guess by looking at the certbot-nginx source directory: https://github.com/certbot/certbot/tree/b1826d657ffc7c278041...
Not in the volumes Buffett is interested in. And they are quite sketchy compare to regulated US financial markets.
It's twice the RAM/program specs of an Arduino (different arch but probably still comparable), which has been useful for many applications.

That said, they don't actually have example source yet for U2F, which is one of the suggested applications. I don't have an instinctive sense whether that would fit in 64K flash, or whether operations like key generation would have to be moved off it to make signing fit.