skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Have we had the conversation yet about the politeness of not trying to hunt down someone who quite apparently does not want to be found?

I'm going to take the con or anti position here.

1. People who commit crimes should be exposed. (Not saying Satoshi has, but answering your question generally)

2. People who engage in public discourse, should not be expected to have their identities remain private.

3. People who potentially have billions of dollars (whether realized or not) should also not expect privacy.

> I feel that there's no value to trying to figure out his/her identity other than personal gain at his/her expense.

Factually incorrect. If I can find out who Satoshi is, I can create a web page and sell ad space on the web page. That's value -- in the best kind -- economic value. And economic value can be more than just personal gain, it can create jobs for others.

> It doesn't help us collectively.

We can ask if he thought about the side effects of Bitcoin while developing his algorithm. E.g. money laundering, increased energy demand for little economic gain, etc.

And interestingly, Bram Cohen has also recently came out with another version of Bitcoin with an algorithm better than PoW.

[Edited to clarify economic value]
I don't think that closes the loophole. Although I don't know much about taxation. AFAIK an Australian manufacturer could just as easily do the same thing - set up a shell company in Ireland or wherever then fund the local company's operations and factories through 'loans' which must be paid back to the parent company in Ireland
I mean, yeah, there is ultimately a judgment call involved. The problem is that many people make judgment calls that are clearly biased toward complexity, with vague non-technical justifications like "This will be useful when we get 10x bigger", "<Last-years-buzzword> is outdated technology", and "This is based on a whitepaper from Google." Unless the project is explicitly intended for experimentation, these are not good justifications!

If you're using something like Docker or Kubernetes, good justifications are like "Docker replaces a bunch of scripts we used to have to use to deploy our compiled binaries over a fleet of servers" and "Kubernetes really helped us measure and manage the shared hosting environment that runs our lightweight services".

How often do you hear these justifications, or others that refer to actual improvements in the technical processes? Usually it's just "containers are really cool d00d" or "We spend way too much on AWS, and since the concept of not using AWS is unfathomable to us, we are collapsing everything down to 8 instances that run Kubernetes and spending tens of thousands of dollars on the engineering overhaul to support that instead of just provisioning cheaper servers."
1) It isn't hypocritical to ask someone to articulate why they don't agree with an assertion.

2) No, that's NOT how the burden of proof works. The initial presumption is that the moving party is speaking truthfully, and objections are raised afterwards. If the objection has enough proof, then the initial party is under the burden to refute the defense. This is literally how our court systems work in civil cases.

The alternate assumption, that every element of every statement needs to be laid out for any statement to be found to be valuable means that every post here would start with a discussion of epistemology.

Edit: torstenvl's post is incorrect - in the initial stages of dispute resolution, in summary judgment and the phases where the claims are evaluated for importance (whether the originating document should be struck, etc.), the claims as drafted in a statement of claim are assumed to be true. This is why default judgment is accepted - because the pleas are accepted truthful. Pleas are also evaluated as if they are true in summary judgment and a number of other pre-trial levels. Once a defense is filed and objection is noted does the burden switch and the evidentiary examination begins. But that requires a defense, and a defense will be struck if it says nothing.

Fortunately, this procedure lines up fairly well with Bayesian inference and the principle of charity.

In any event, this meta discussion seems to have generated ill will and little understanding, so I'll let it rest where it lies.

Thanks for the spell-check! Common error of mine.
Thanks. I was specifically intrigued by your description of the microcontroller inside the motor, thinking it must be just for sensing and PID control, since unlikely it would have enough room to do the actual power drive. That Power Stage Controller is interesting, but somewhat obsolete since everyone's moving to Field-Oriented Control now, which requires a lot more grunt than an 8-bit micro.
A policy against frivolous ER visits isn't necessarily a bad thing, it's that Anthem's system for determining what's frivolous was obviously flawed in this case.

Side-splitting abdominal pain is a valid reason to go to the ER. But doesn't mean it's not sensible for Anthem to have a policy against footing the bill for ER visits for ingrown toenails -- an ER doc in Australia was recently telling me too much of his day is wasted seeing patients who aren't really sick, since Australia has a more generous healthcare system.

But to me the bigger issue is a noninvasive visit to the ER cost 12K. It's easy to get riled up about a cabal of penny-pinching insurers cackling on their pile of gold coins while people suffer, but how does the hospital get off blame-free for that kind of gross overbilling?

I'm no fan of the business practices of insurers. But insurance is not magic beans. The money doesn't just fall from the sky. If everyone on the plan goes for 12K ER visits the premiums are going to skyrocket for everyone else. Realistically they have to reign in costs somehow, it's just a matter of finding an ethical balance.

Someone in the industry told me Anthem makes the most money of any insurer and its profit margin is 3%. Most of the profit is being captured elsewhere in the chain.
Previous discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16192608

The Python version I wrote and linked to back then (which is a bit less general): https://gitlab.com/snippets/1694391
2019 BMW 8 Series – Ready to Fight S Class Coupe
You realize that’s not what efficient means, right?
The border has a general mandate for search. If they want to search it, they can search it. Searches of this sort are rare, but seemingly well supported in law. Unfortunately, IIRC this power also extends about 50mi from any land border, enabling vehicle searches waaaay past the "border".

If the South wall is put into place, it might be possible to justify reducing the margin in which they can conduct searches without warrant, but at the moment it's a crucial tool both practically and in the minds of those charged with defending the border.

Sadly, a considerable number of people in the U.S. are dead set against the wall, and don't understand that the requirement for ladders and climbing makes non-customs crossings more conspicuous and time-consuming, making unpredictable and regular patrols considerably more effective whether or not the wall proves to be a total impasse.
Not necessarily. At least I don't know how this works in smash, but in competitive fencing I'd see people go 50-50 consistently locally, but one would always do drastically better at nationals, year after year after year.

Right like there are A rank fencers, and then there are A rank fencers who actually have a shot at placing on the points table.

I'm not sure why.
Almost nothing is a free market - so you have to be careful of the no true Scotsman fallacy.
Fitness App Strava Releases Location of Secret US Millitary Bases
I unfocused it wrong and now I can see it in hexadecimal. Awesome!
Office 2016 really sucks compares to 2013. It feels like a browser app. Is it UWP?
UberX Pricing by City [Raw Data]
Well, one issue is that there are different date formats used worldwide and there's a risk that the website will accidentally swap the month and date if I simply enter three numbers without thinking about them. mm-dd-yy and dd-mm-yy are both used occasionally.
Sorry, the conflation of Yugoslavia with "proxy war" was in error, you're totally correct.

The link to great power conflict I had in mind there was the pressure cooker effect of Tito's dictatorship, which suppressed the major conflicts of the region without solving them. But it's a rather different entity than wars with direct meddling, and I can't judge the counterfactual: would a lack of Communist dictatorship have caused an earlier and more peaceful dissolution, or simply hastened what happened anyway?

It's a bad example and I shouldn't have used it; thank you.
Right - it's patently false. If there was no incentive to develop new video compression, then why would anyone pay someone else to develop new video compression (buying licenses) either?
Thanks for taking the con position. Here are some of my thoughts.

Re: #3. I don't understand why being wealthy means you cannot expect privacy.

Re: creating a webpage: that's what I meant by: "other than personal gain". Ie. if you can figure it out, you can profiteer.

Re: asking about side-effects. Yes, fair enough. There are certainly some academic benefits of knowing who it is. You might be able to pressure them into answering questions. Though I think it's implicit that if the individual does not want to be found, they're unlikely to suddenly be welcoming and happy to answer questions.
For the DeLorean, there's pretty much just 4 that matter: oil pressure, voltage, temperature, and brake fluid light. I wouldn't drive any long distance without being able to see these.
The government argues that searches at international borders is a "reasonable" search, thus the 4th amendment's prohibition on "unreasonable searches and seizures" doesn't apply.

The EFF disagrees. You can read their reasoning in the linked article.
Some people have goals with their speculation. I assure you many of these people are gamblers, but there are plenty of reasonable folk in the space too. It's just you don't hear them beating the drum as loudly as the naive.
> DASH is not royalty-free

It is, the above is just a list that trolls are assembling to intimidate others. They have it on many thigns, including established royalty free codecs. If they sue someone with it and prove in court they actually own patents on DASH - then it will be another story. Until then - intimidation doesn't equal ownership.

In this industry, such intimidating tactics (very protection racket and mafia like) are commonplace. Check the story how Qualcomm and some others tried to intimidate Opus project.
Sanctions may be diminishing North Korea's military capability
Rainforest QA (YC S12) Is Hiring a Remote/SF Senior Back End Engineer
> they abstract things which don't need to be abstracted

I'm trying to remember the last time I encountered a code base more than a year old and thought "the problem here is too much attempt at abstraction and elegance".

Broadly, my experience is approximately the opposite: over-abstraction happens to meet amorphous and unpredictable use cases, while any longstanding code base is full of un-designed hacks that arise from a constant short-term approach.
"You're not the target audience, ignore it and move on" isn't a good enough reason to allow these companies to continue doing this.

Should we really just let them exploit those who aren't as good as we are at detecting this? No, no we shouldn't. Turning the other cheek because you're immune and not calling them out on it is part of the reason that advertisers have pushed further and further into exploitative methods.
J20 protests: What it's like to face 60 years in prison for protesting Trump
The documentation seems to me to say that max_allowed_packet limits the total size of the storage that a JSON field can take. Of course that also puts an implicit limit on the size of individual keys or values in a JSON object stored in the field, or elements of a JSON array.
Kind of a pedantic comment given the articles content...

Do designers who design webpages/apps generally call themselves GUI designers?
At the risk of going off on a tangent, your pessimism is unwarranted.

Consider, first of all, that we're having this discussion on a message board with participants from all over the world. That's a meaningful benefit of software.

I read both the original article and this discussion with a screen reader, because I'm visually impaired. I can also use a screen reader to read ebooks. Sure, I have enough sight that I could read regular print with a simple magnifier. But without software, my totally blind friends would have to wait for the things they want to read to be transcribed into braille, recorded, or read to them in person. This, to me, is a benefit of software that goes way beyond convenience.

I could go on, but this blog post by Bertrand Meyer responds to general pessimism about software better than I could: https://bertrandmeyer.com/2013/03/12/apocalypse-no-part-1/
Pinker does not argue that access to justice is increasing in Better Angels. He elaborates on the point of Rule of Law, which is related in concept but distinct.

There's a few weaknesses in his statements re: the Rule of Law, but that's outside of the scope of my critique.
The DeLorean is actually more reliable now than it was back then because we have 37 years of test data available on what goes bad and how to prevent it. There's also a number of improved components available made from newer materials.

Also it did really well in the crash tests of the 80's and current owners baby them, so the insurance is pretty cheap.
Even with intrinsics that do have a degree of portability, I prefer the more explicit form of the bit counting just for readability. Nobody has to learn what popcnt means.

These optimizations really mean that as software writers we can declare our intent and have the compiler do safe optimizations.

It seems like these optimizations of Clang are also quite insensitive to the many different ways of writing the same thing that C++ has earned notoriety for.
That’s because the new thing they want to sell is CarPlay / Auto. Car dealers are not your friends.
> IIRC they pulled a hack where Cisco is providing a decoder binary

OpenH264 is only used for WebRTC and, importantly, there's no AAC support (which doesn't matter for WebRTC because you can just use Opus). Firefox uses the OS platform's H.264 decoder for video element playback.

> which cisco was already almost at anyways, so that didn't cost cisco much

It apparently cost Cisco quite a lot more in licensing fees but they considered it worth it for the sake of integration with their video conferencing hardware. See the comments to this blog post from Monty Montgomery for some discussion on it:

https://xiphmont.dreamwidth.org/61694.html

https://xiphmont.dreamwidth.org/61694.html?thread=439550#cmt...
Why is Sunburst better than Sankey charts for depicting User flows in your app
> which was whether developers should be overriding designers and domain experts in matters of design

in matters of UX...
The problem in my experience working in "enterprise" shops is that more often that that, most of the employee hierarchy is in on the scam - managers know developers are padding hours, developers know middle managers are peddling snake oil up the chain, and senior managers are painting a picture of success to their superiors to get their big fat bonus. And very often, almost all of it is an illusion, and when everyone's done and the final product sucks for end users, everyone responsible has long ago declared it to be a smashing success and moved on, and the poor support developers have Yet Another Over-engineered Mess on their hands. Rinse, repeat.
Does anyone know what happened to Daala? It seemed like it was going great but has been quiet for several years now.

https://xiph.org/daala/
> Social media shaming, unfortunately, seems to be the fast lane to escalated customer support.

More and more it’s the only lane.

> Good to know for other Coinbase customers.

Public shaming on a tech forum or social media should never be a viable channel for consumer support. It’s a symptom of the breakdown of all other channels.
In the United States, Software Patents Are Still Consistently Invalidated
There are greedy algorithms in computing that make sense sometimes.
Looks like a classic power play ala ticketmaster, albeit with better prices, for now.
Isn't the current pricing model for VMware on AWS pretty terrible?

They need something where Amazon makes money on it, but also encourages the most popular use case...as a DR site for customer's on-prem VMs. At the moment, reserving that DR capacity is the same cost as using it. I would think Amazon's scale would allow for a better deal.
You probably need to take a step back and ask what metrics are being optimised and why.

Someone has decided to optimise directly on present ad dollars, rather than user satisfaction which might correlate to future ad dollars. This might be a rational decision. Or it might be a short-termist error, or a case of optimising what is easiest to measure rather than what matters.
That covers an unbelievably huge portion of the US population.
Seamless virtualization is done on xbone, which is an Intel AMD64 chip emulating a PPC to play 360 games
John McDonnell claims Venezuela's problem is that it was not socialist enough
> It definitely sounds like UEFI mandates support of it for internal drive

I can see why you would interpret it that way, but the section you quoted doesn't say that.

The spec for the ESP is based off of FAT32, which means that in practice, all firmwares can read any FAT32 partition. While the ESP must be FAT32 (with the different filesystem GUID), any random FAT32 partition is not an ESP.

I really don't mean to overexplain this or belabor the point (forgive me if it comes across that way, but perhaps bear with me, too), but a FAT32 partition may be a boot partition without being the ESP (just as an ext4fs partition might be).

The parts of the spec you quoted are not referring explicitly to an ESP, but just "any recognized partition" which also includes non-ESP FAT32 partitions. In particular,

> Hard drives may contain multiple partitions as defined in Section 12.2.2 on partition discovery.

I just double-checked and §12.2.2 refers to generic discovery of all partitions, not just the ESP ("This specification requires the firmware to be able to parse the legacy master boot record(MBR) (see Section 5.2.1), GUID Partition Table (GPT)(see Section 5.3.2), and El Torito (see Section 12.2.2.1) logical device volumes.")

> Any partition on the hard drive may contain a file system that the EFI firmware recognizes

Already addressed, but also includes support for other filesystems so that a, say, consumer electronic with a custom filesystem load its OS from said device, is not out of spec.
Sounds normal... "Brian" had a cracked screen.
For those in the market for an X399/TR4 motherboard, have you come to any conclusions?
I'm not going to get into a tit-for-tat with ABCLAW, but for the edification of readers who might otherwise be inclined to believe the assertion in the sibling comment, it is NOT on the objector to provide evidence. The moving party bears the burden of proof.

Sometimes the initial burden of proof is merely prima facie evidence, after which the burden shifts. For example, in some states, a defendant in a murder case need only make a prima facie case that the killing was done in self-defense, after which the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that it wasn't self-defense. But even in that case, the initial moving party bears the initial burden of proof.

Also, ABCLAW: it's spelled "judgment."
Φαβορί μακριά από την έδρα του με αρκετή τύχη
States[1], not governments[2]; an often unrecognized distinction. Also, while the layperson might not think about the state having a monopoly on violence, it's not exactly a secret or controversial thing. See the Wikipedia article on the topic[3] and this clip of Barack Obama[4][5].

That Obama clip is somewhat popular with libertarian types, accompanied with some form of, "See! Aha! He's admitting it!". As a "libertarian type" myself (though I try not to use that word to describe myself since it has a muddled meaning), my reaction is more along the lines of, "Well, yea."

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_(polity)
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly_on_violence
[4] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kpITpm5NxOE&t=1m54s (not endorsing the source)
[5] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kpITpm5NxOE&t=1m35s (more context)
But 'unsubbing' from sketch spam will just mark your email address as known good for more spam. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
My account at coinbase has been in a stuck status forever and I've contacted support. I never get any responses.

Not sure how they operate with horrid support.
Down vote harder!
-$16.6 billion in debt is a scalar and +$11 billion in annual revenue is a rate. But is all that revenue profitable?

It doesn't mention it in the article, but Dr. Pepper reports profit of about $1 billion per quarter and does not appear to be in any state of distress: https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/DPS/
What's behind rich people pretending to be self-made?
Good idea on markdown, it should be a quick fix and quality of life improvement.

Didn’t know punctuator existed, I’ll look into that!
South Australia Currently Running on 100% Renewable Energy
The 4th amendment protects against unreasonable search and seizure, and the state must show cause for conducting any search. At a border crossing, search for contraband (including contraband plants and animals which can seriously damage the United States) are an exception because it's reasonable to search people at a border crossing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_search_exception

Here, the EFF has to show that the search that was conducted wasn't reasonable in some manner or that it otherwise violates due process. They will need to show that the execution of the search wasn't reasonable, because being subject to a search in and of itself generally is. The only SCotUS ruling on search of electronic devices has been Riley v California (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riley_v._California) where they ruled that a search warrant was required to search an electronic device even when an individual has already been placed under arrest.
Take a look at: https://www.aemo.com.au/Electricity/National-Electricity-Mar...
It's now hosting this project, and seems to have created this page and reformed the project a bit. And have you seen the foundation's website?

They have a tiered sponsor page to act as badge of honor for the tech companies with the most money. Their board of directors are 22 of some of the most powerful tech companies in the world. They "host" an amalgam of different tech products (actually working in legal entities to control the projects, it seems, under their LLC). They sponsor conferences, seemingly just to decide the future of the industry with a bunch of connected higher-ups and project leads. They don't appear to have a lot of transparency in terms of where their money is going, what guides the organization, why it exists, what it is doing, etc.

The most annoying thing about it to me is how a bunch of open source projects are actually just product placement for corporations, with press blurbs regurgitating bullshit business speak about something like logging formats.

It used to be that we used the best tool for the job. Now we use whatever tool has the most buzzwords and corporate sponsorship. This foundation appears to be spookily pushing that agenda, under the badge of Linux, for whatever reason. It's creepy.