skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I don't understand how this holds true though, because to actually send someone money you need to actually... get them the money. A great counter-example of this is that the exchanges in Zimbabwe were trading at a 100% premium when you actually wanted to settle a transaction in cash.

So whilst you can transfer money censorship free, you and the recipient need to then handle the transfer into and out of crypto which seems to be in many cases more difficult than actually transferring money other ways.

Not to mention the fact that that purpose is an astonishingly niche thing to want to do - at least in first world countries.

Are you suggesting crypto has no long-term value in the west?
"This is why debates never change eachother's mind, because we hold on to certain "facts" "

Disagree with the generalisation. Most yes, but not all.
I used to be like it, as well, but consciously changed. I still feel mostly superior, though, but I am still open for reconsidering every one of my points, as I still remember really silly points of views I once had and considered superior.

Plus, I also found out, that if I am in fact superior - meaning I really understand the other person's (flawed) point of view even though he maybe communicates it poorly, I am usually able to get important points through if worded and timed right ...

But in general I believe the main problem is, that most people just never learned to communicate properly.

edit: but yes, when people are really angry, they don't listen, so what works sometimes, to ask them, if they also want to listen to my reply ... so that makes them thinking a bit. In one instance I remember getting a plain no. So I told him I go away as this is no communication anymore. And I did and later he came to and said, now he wants to listen - and we calmly sorted everything out, what would have otherwise potentially evolved into a violent fight.
https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/research/experime...

This link is not exactly about low gravity (it's about zero gravity effects), but it might be reasonable to assume that the same mechanism may work in low gravity too.
incorrect. the company sees money from the transaction in several indirect ways. the existence of the market is what enabled the company to go public in the first place.
> It's unhealthy to pretend that undesired behaviors in IT are generally the result of autism.

Not what I did; no need to start bifurcating. What I asserted (or, what I meant) is that people on the spectrum are more common in IT. I never said that everyone in IT is autistic. I never argued Torvalds has autism.

> It perpetuates an unhealthy culture by essentially saying that guys (because it's only guys who are excused this way)

No idea where you got either of these red herrings from. That's certainly not what I asserted.

I do want to note though that women with autism largely go un(der)diagnosed.

> It's also insulting to people with autism

Hi, I have autism, as I acknowledged in another post throughout this thread. There's a rule on HN that you shouldn't assume the worst explanation from a post. Well, you just did, cause why would I willingly try to insult everyone with autism if I have it myself? How that make any sense whatsoever? I don't see at all why my post can be considered offensive unless you resort to things like bifurcations...

> It's also insulting to people with autism to lump their legitimate social difficulties in with people who are simply choosing to be assholes.

People with autism need to function in a non-autistic society. The current therapy I am getting is focussed on that. Using autism as an excuse isn't acceptable; its considered counter-productive.

> There is no indication I see that Torvalds is autistic. He's certainly not socially awkward. He manages an organization of thousands of contributors very effectively.

I don't find him very strong, socially. Read his body language while he's giving a talk. He's shy, at the very least. Just because someone can express themselves easily via e-mail doesn't mean they're not socially awkward.

Also, what I quoted is not mutually exclusive. More importantly, there is no such thing as a binary autism flag; it is a spectrum.

What Torvalds suffers from is that he expresses his anger with unnecessary cursewords in order to give his arguments strength (a fallacy). To name another example: I've never seen RMS do that, but I have seen TdR do that. I find neither of them particularly strong socially, either.
Well, not everyone is aware of this, and 2nd hand mining card price points on various market platforms probably will push down the prices of everything else to varying extents. (both new, as well as 2nd hand gamer cards).
I wonder how much archival footage we might be able to give a second look knowing what we know now.
It's true, but apparently it's getting close to be implemented into Linux[1][2].

[1] https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=WireGuar...

[2] https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Systemd-...
Software engineer Position
> I can see it very slowly starting to unravel and quality issues starting to sneak in

I know what you mean here, and I agree with you 100%.

That being said, I can't help but chuckle because if you've ever looked at a vendor's GPL source code for the kernel (Android phone, NAS/router) you know it's the SoCs vendor's old SDK (lots of bodge) with the ODMs additional bodges for their product customizations.

Yes, I am VERY glad that the mainline kernel has Linus and his nose for BS. But just go look at the vendor forks if you want to see some even worse shit than these patches!

Allwinner's GPL is basically garbage. You can find quality rants from tkaiser (Armbian) about this.

MediaTek doesn't even release theirs! Yes, this IS a GPL violation, and no they don't seem to care.

At least Amlogic seems to have woken up and realized an active kernel development community is an asset for them.
This is going to do nothing to solve the "debate". Moon landing deniers will find an excuse to dismiss this evidence like they have for the rest.
There is a free and open Ada implementation these days: GNAT, the GNU Ada Translator, is a full and complete implementation of Ada.
> "wouldn't be her thing"

If that is the case, are you asserting that all of these displaced women are choosing fields of studies that they're not a good fit for?
I meant it in a similar sense to that in which some hobbies are often irrational if you consider them only for market value. I probably could have chosen a better term.

An amateur painter will often spend far more time than any reasonable estimation of the market value of that job would justify. Part of this is lack of efficiency and experience, but another part is doing things with sharply diminishing returns. For example, you might apply expensive techniques to inexpensive materials, in a way that would not make for a viable business.

Put it another way - amateurs can easily arrive at a finished job (of painting, in this case) that they would never be able to convince themselves to pay market rate for. This is irrational in certain restricted senses.

For what it's worth I don't believe that "lemons market" is accurate for painters in general, but I'm guessing there is a segment of it that meets your description.
>Once you logged into the VPN you had carte-blanche access to all kinds of things.

In my experience this isn't generally true and hasn't been true in properly run organizations since the late 90's. I don't know if it was the case at Google at some point in the past (seems unlikely). Everywhere I've worked for decades has viewed the internal network as hostile. You need credentials to access every internal site/app/resource (including the cafeteria menu). The VPN is just an extra onion layer to guard against screwups with internal endpoint protection, and because to be honest it is pretty easy to deploy so why not.
But just by being adopted and mined it can't go to zero. It's a scam because it was designed to keep all transactions on chain so miners would benefit from high fees(and they would be high if it replaced bitcoin)

It was designed to avoid a fix that would prevent the use of asicboost.

You're goalpost of a zero or near zero value is bad. Even fake art can be sold.
I think your original question is a good one. It must be thoroughly proven and not just taken as gospel.

You may find cases where decoupling a service is a good idea. That doesn't justify decoupling everything by default. The more you decouple the more rigid becomes the whole system.
I wonder whether one could show this. maybe by pretending the image is actually a cell in a periodic grid, then transform this grid, and rotate this grid. The periodicity would make roation possible without getting empty spots.
This looks less like allowing hacks for states and more like covering their asses in benchmarks.
Oh, I'm pretty sure that governments will try to ban bitcoin, given that it gets more traction as an actual medium of exchange. I'm trying to assess if they'll succeed, and if so, "how?"
> I'm a little bit tempted to make a simple compile-to-go language.

That's what I did for my current project. I love Go but for web apps is not the best in my opinion. I had some spare time and ended up building a VM that compiles typescript to bytecode. The performance loss is minimal, I still use the Go std library but it is a pleasure to use VS Code, generics (the VM ignores types but the TS compiler gives you static type safety, autocompletion, refactoring, etc...) Also exceptions is great for web apps where usually there is nothing else you can do but save all the info that you can and show an error to the user.
The problem is the death rate of electricity generation. Because you are killing as many people playing computer games, or turning on your microwave, or ...

Or, said another way: what service does bitcoin provide, as opposed to say banking? Because that is what it is "trying" to replace. How many deaths does banking produce? Will replacing a part of the banking activities with bitcoin increase or decrease the death rate?
I like the idea in principle but betting, real money or not, relies on agreed upon, objective results/outcomes. There in lies the problem; who's going to be the arbiter of truth?

However, it seems possible to get further along than we are now by creating betting pools/markets where the participants do agree on a set of sources for information.

Actually, I've thought along these lines before rather indirectly by theorizing that the WSJ was probably the most non-partisan source of "news" because most of it's clientele demanded such due to their participation in the markets. But I realize that's highly speculative.
If you had read the paper, you would have found that they tested and rejected the idea that reviewers were overcompensating due to guessing what was being tested. In Experiment 5, they sent single resumes to reviewers and asked them to rate on a 1-10 scale. Female candidates still scored significantly higher.
I don't think I agree, and I think your examples do not support your point.

In the case of the number of legitimately convicted people, you seem to think zero is the ideal. In a sense, I think we can probably all agree. But what we really want is the number of people committing crimes to be zero. If it is not zero, then surely the ideal number of people legitimately convicted is equal to the number of people who have committed crimes. If it is not, then we are saying we want people who have committed crimes to walk free. So in this sense, "worst" is, in fact, a judgment.

But "everyone" agreeing doesn't even mean something isn't a judgment. There is no objective "worst". And in the case of divorce, you're wrong. Divorce has been hugely beneficial for women's equality, and my own personal divorce was definitely not a tragedy.
You're absolutely insane if you think we should abandon capitalism. It is about the only social system that does not result in the state killing hundreds of millions of it's own. The ideologies that you profess here are incredibly dangerous.
The example in the article is really bad. It won't fool anybody. It's distinctly robotic and nasal.
but why would you pay for the protocol and bother with switching, if you have a good-enough solution with free protocols and paying for services with ad money.
why did the gulenists use bylock when they could have used whatsapp or signal? it looks like they are getting rounded up because their use of an obscure app has become a strong signal that they are gulenists. though, signal might have had similar problems. not sure how popular it is in turkey.
Even if you are 100% self-employed, your professional life is going to be about adapting yourself to other people's systems. Whether it's through a GED and then community college or whatever, now is the time to develop that skill.

If you write it off as, "maybe high school just wasn’t right for me" you're going to find yourself 10 years from now saying, "that job just wasn't right for me... along with the 5 others before it."

Start learning how to fit in inside a system you don't enjoy. It's as important a skill as actually being good at your job.
I recently decided to buy a Kia Forte over a Honda Civic because Honda (and the dealer) had the nerve to charge me an expensive trim level (23.5k over 20k) just to get a dashboard with Android Auto. I have no regrets, its a great little sedan!

The ability to integrate smartphone/tablet apps within the car is arguably more of a safety feature than just a "trim option" and it befuddles me why car manufacturers see it fit to charge a premium as egregious as BMW is. Knock that shit off, it adds dollars to the cost of the hardware and software development.

I'd say it should be a regulatory matter but that just means, like with rear view cameras, manufacturers will build that into the price.

If CarPlay matters to you, i'm sure there are other brands of automobile that agree with your line of thinking.
Wow, I can imagine that expression becoming a very compelling analogy in a trial or competitor's marketing.
> with full effects of the shutdown beginning around Monday with the new week.

That's just because most government services are always off on the weekend, not because of a delay. The news was distributed widely and broadly near instantly.
Thanks for the rec, looks interesting.
People with phonagnosia are incapable of recognizing anyone's voice. If it is like face-blindness, then probably there is a spectrum of ability to recognize voices, and so what sounds obviously computerish to you might be indistinguishable from the real thing to someone else.

https://www.thecut.com/2016/09/voice-recognition-apparently-...
Well, users can easily switch, to an extent (Google increasingly ties its services together, meaning you lose out if you use other Google products but not search).

But, if you depend on incoming Google traffic, you can't "switch." It is this side of the equation where Google's search dominance is troubling. That, and ads.
>How can BTC survive 100 years if no one can download the massive blockchain? Most residential IPs enforce a 1TB/mo cap

This is specifically why the bulk of the community has stayed on a chain that limits blocks to 1 MB blocks. If you increase the shared resource, blockspace that everyone has to store, you increase free-rider problems and the tragedy of commons that goes with them. Given your question, and the properties of the Bitcoin blockchain size today, the rate of blocks being issued, it would take ~13 years before the blockchain would reach 1 TB.

Since there is no central authority in bitcoin, there isn't a process where one can screen out "spam" and legitimate uses. The only way to do it this is to rate limit transactions. Periodically you'll see people come on to the network and try to issue large volumes of incredibly low-value transactions into the mempool queue. Are those spam transactions? I'll let you decide.

See here:

https://dedi.jochen-hoenicke.de/queue/#all

Second chart shows that there's about 16 BTC worth of outstanding transactions in the queue for inclusion in a block (about 1 PPM of total coins in circulation). The third chart shows that there is about 170 MB of transactions and you can see large number of low-fee, low value transactions being dumped on to the network.
Everything is a weapon in the right (wrong?) hands. People want to keep weapons from their perceived enemies. Until there's a weapon only "good" can wield, nothing will liberate us all :/
I'm of belief that the inefficiency scales with internal organizational complexity, which roughly scales with size. Basically, the more people you need to involve for a typical step in a project, the less efficient you get. Government branches seem to be terribly inefficient, because even the smallest one is in fact responsible to a lot of people (other agencies, oversight bodies, politicians and, ultimately, the public).
Thanks - interesting!

So, let's imagine that the Statue of Liberty in Manhattan was copyright, such that you couldn't take (or at least benefit commercially from photos) of it...

The author of the original article used a photo of a very similar statue, but one that is based in Tokyo. I don't know whether they're identical, but let's assume not, and that there is no similar copyright.

(I appreciate this is very hypothetical, but so was your "let's say I ran a random number generator" argument.)

The author of the original article used a photo of the Tokyo statue with the intention that readers would interpret it as the Manhattan statue.

Would the author be deemed to have infringed the copyright on the Manhattan statue?

By your "if your goal was to come up with something that looks like it, and you stop when you have something that resembles it (doesn't matter if the match is good or bad), you will be deemed to have copied it" definition, it seems they would.
"I said powerless to help you, not punish you." --Chief Wiggum

Maybe ensuring that the economic hostages of a shutdown will actually suffer is an essential government function?

It wouldn't surprise me if there were a few people trespassing on closed national parklands right now, without incidents. And a few of them might even be furloughed employees.
I felt like Roger s till held the disposable stuff to some level of ... reasonableness ... but yeah his system was relative to the film.

I liked it as you didn't have to slam some fun, but dumb, action flick to praise anther film, and yet you knew from Roger what you were in for.
(29) Pinterest
> Imagine getting called a moron in front of the whole world

If he was right about what I did, I would make damn sure that I didn't do it again.

I believe he's being obnoxious because the people submitting these patches are trying to quietly pull some bullshit.

If you're trying to affect countless people and companies across the world with questionable actions, I don't care how bad you feel.
> it's the ensuring that the library got everywhere it needed to go and that the new release of the other users of that library didn't introduce any bugs.

And guess what, you have to do the same thing with microservices. You must ensure that all its clients are pointing to the correct version, and you must ensure that the new version didn't add any bugs in the clients.

Adaptations for new service versions will also get into the release queue, and can also get blocked by other stuff.
They may exist, but they'd figure it out pretty quickly when they can't get into the office or access any job-related systems (which is what happens during a shutdown).
I agree it wouldn't be helpful.

It is similar to the problem of DNA evidence tests. The technique can be extremely certain, but the entire process chain must be evaluated in order to gauge trust.

How likely is it that the evidence was correctly sampled, collected, was actually on the victim etc.

For votes there is great benefit in having a paper process which can not be mass forged as easily as computer votes or tallies etc. It might take longer but it is of high importance.
Does the new Cloudflare Access product (maybe with their Warp product) address your concerns? It means visitors never need to have access to your physical network, their traffic only goes to the specific machines you intend.
Definitely! My C coding improved vastly after spending some time with Ada. Though it's worth keeping in mind that it's not only about each individual thing being good – it's also that they work really well together.
Why are you assuming it wasn't a female coder
I think there’s two points of view here. On the one hand yes, if someone gets into your castle then they may have a lot of access you don’t want to give them. However that assumes that things inside these walls are also not secured, which is often not the case.

The other point of view is that the castle wall gives you added protection against unknown unknowns that could mean there are security issues with your now public facing infrastructure. By just exposing everything publicly you create this potential big risk. Google’s preaching here glosses over this fact.
The short and long of BeyondCorp:

- Instead of a single VPN that will expose your entire squishy corporate LAN to anyone who gets VPN access, each application gets its own protected proxy.

- The protected proxies query a centrally-aggregated auth/authz database, which can work with client-side software to ensure qualities such as private key possession, full disk encryption, software updates, etc. In Google's case, this is combined with a host-rewriting browser extension for usability.

- Access proxies can easily funnel HTTP traffic, but some more clever solutions involving tunnels exist for plain old TCP and UDP.

By giving every application its own authentication and access control proxy, each application is secured on its own, hence "zero-trust."
Show HN: I launched AboutDevs: A site builder for developers with a search engine
Adding another perspective: as someone who follows kernel news very casually, it's pretty near impossible for me to determine which instances of "Linus curses something/someone out" are related to actual Serious Things Deserving My Attention. There's a bit of boy-who-cried-wolf to the whole thing.
"Things are looking up" was caused by a single change: They raised their prices, especially the cheapest "starving hacker" tier was raised from $1 to $3.5, while prices for other tiers were raised but not by as much.

IIRC, they later commented that this had almost no impact on their subscriber count. They are serving almost everyone who has a major interest in their subject, and the market turned out to be much less price-sensitive than they expected. They could have avoided many years of shoestring budgets just by raising their prices earlier.
I've heard a theory for explaining that that goes like this:

1. choosing a career path you're not interested in can be considered a luxury

2. women tend to be less interested in computer science

3. people in the "first world" tend to have more luxuries of all sorts since they are wealthier

4. thus, percentage of women in STEM anti-correlates with GDP-per-capita
looks like only 500 out of the 10000 are online, and the rest may take until 2019?
Cal Newport's advice contradicts his in some places (especially regarding note taking in class).
There is no such thing as a free lunch.
We're not to the point of nobody being able to compete with Amazon, though. Amazon is winning but other companies still exist and are fighting, so Amazon can't just raise prices arbitrarily and expect customers to not look elsewhere. Amazon has only benefited consumers so far.