skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
If you define "worthy" as "financially successful" then there is a lot

HDNet

So many media appearances that he's a celebrity and his appearance at a location becomes valuable/monetizable. (Dancing With The Stars, Entourage, etc.)

Shark Tank (9 seasons of broadcast /syndicated tv - think about money from the reruns)

Dallas Mavericks (NBA sports team) owner who has appreciated the value of the franchise not to mention won championships

And last but not least he is accessible to entrepreneurs and responsive via email.
Philosophy is great stuff, I've read my share. I've also got a few linear foot of questionable material on my bookshelf. The Carlos Castenada stuff is clearly bullshit and mostly there just as a cautionary tale. I can't make up my mind about Heidegger because I just don't understand his writing . . . he's either brilliant, or he's blowing smoke up the world's fundament; heck, maybe both.

One of my cow-orkers took a bunch of philosophy in college (I think he was at Stanford, in the mid 1970s). He said his course on logic spent a lot of time on DeMorgan's theorem. I don't know about other s/w engineers, but this is something that I use practically every day, usually without even thinking about it -- I don't even remember being taught it, I just sort of figured it out one day early in my career, while I was cleaning up some badly written conditionals.

Cuban's point about knowing philosophy (... which branch? who knows?) is still useful. But it's equally useful to have a wide background in other things than software, when you're writing software. I had a manager once who had a law degree and a Jesuit education, and he was formidable when it came to dealing with department politics and HR bullshit. Just about any value of X in the phrase, "I can write software and do X..." will do you well.
I always thought it was some kind of contraction of "isso e certo". The same expression also exist in Spanish.
Never happened in twenty years.

Manually installed packages are already segregated and can be uninstalled ya know. Might be a problem if you have no admin skills.
"Next up was former armed robber Frank Prosper, now an actor, who said he purposefully avoided thinking about the rights and wrongs of what he was doing while he was an active criminal."

This is the mental process, in various forms, that criminals use to do what they do. Rand identified this as the "blank-out" and the root of all evil;

"Thinking is man’s only basic virtue, from which all the others proceed. And his basic vice, the source of all his evils, is that nameless act which all of you practice, but struggle never to admit: the act of blanking out, the willful suspension of one’s consciousness, the refusal to think — not blindness, but the refusal to see; not ignorance, but the refusal to know." [1]

The error is in the title, the criminals don't justify their actions to themselves and all the other justifications in the article are how criminals justify their actions to others when called out to explain what they did, i.e. rationalization.

[1] http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/evasion.html
It sounds like a calque of regular Spanish 'a que si' rather than anything else.
From the Wiki page, if people are wondering why it never took off:

> The published specifications are very incomplete, being only sufficient for writing operating system code that can support a JVM that uses Jazelle. The declared intent is that only the JVM software needs to (or is allowed to) depend on the hardware interface details. This tight binding facilitates that the hardware and JVM can evolve together without affecting other software. In effect, this gives ARM Holdings considerable control over which JVMs are able to exploit Jazelle. It also prevents open source JVMs from using Jazelle.

So it sounds like ARM tried (presumably) to leverage it to make some profit off of support agreements, but ended up falling on their own sword.
Thank you, I will definitely make it my goal to include more features on GitMeet utilizing the GitHub/Twitter APIs.
I don't know that form is the key. Both of my injuries that put me off of lifting the last time were done under the watchful eye of my trainer. There was no cheating.

Something just 'popped', both times. And put me out of commission for weeks. First time was in my legs, the other was in my neck.

Rip does advise shifting to accommodate injury. But that's the extent of his advice.
As a heavy FreeBASIC user for 13 years, I like to describe it as a subset of C++98 with BASIC syntax and decent builtin strings. Unlike C++ it compiles very quickly, and if you want faster code, it can emit C code and compile via gcc. the very nice fbfrog tool automatically translates C headers to FB headers, so you can use almost any C-compatible library and do almost anything you can do in C. Using it like C is not necessary a good idea.

Compared to all other BASIC dialects I've tried (which doesn't include VB), it seems better engineered. Compared to C, the main drawback is the immaturity of the compiler, and error messages are often poor.
Or you buy $10,000 worth of Ethereum, and the value goes up to $100,000. Then you convert the Ethereum into Dogecoin, and your $100,000 worth of Dogecoin goes to $1,000 but you don't sell it before the end of the year.
You know, the problem I have with Proof of Work isn't that it costs in electricity—it's that the Malthusian race-to-the-bottom of mining efficiency has completely destroyed the computer hardware market (for regular consumers.) It's to the point that GPU manufacturers are trying to make classes of cards that only work with games, so that consumers will have something to buy that's actually in stock.
I've been fortunate that the trainers I've had have focused very much on proper technique and form which lays the foundations to prevent injury. Online, Kelly Starret's Mobility WOD (https://www.mobilitywod.com) is a great resource. I really like his philosophy of teaching people the tools to diagnose their own problems and working on them, both to prevent future injury and notice when injury may be sneaking up on you. His book is good, too. I'm unfamiliar with the one you already have, so it may cover a lot of the same ground.
Solving Battleships with SAT
Many people think the current buzz in AI is about intelligent machines instead of highly repeatable pattern recognition. I suspect we are several major advancements away from sentient machines and in a few years the buzz over ML will die down as we realize that it isn't much more than a great at sorting inputs.
I find it difficult to believe that any sort of scaling of the org could have occurred in the span of six months thanks to the efforts of a single individual.
It's also light on approaches to HA (hence my – apparentely misunderstood – addition to the list). Postgres's documentation itself is much more thorough: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/10/static/different-replicat...

And gives a little more insight into backup options too: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/10/static/backup.html
I was hoping someone would find that. It is interesting how many negative and middlebrow comments were on that submission. As there are this one as well.
My favourite on the yes/no front though is the border between Greece and Bulgaria where "Ne" (Не) means no in Bulgarian and, IIUC, yes in Greek.

And then the Bulgarians also have approximately reversed vs Western Europe head movements for yes and no, to maximise confusion :)
Just an info: Focusing mind at the gut level is not specific to Zen meditation but is instead part of Yoga Sutras of Patanjali (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yoga_Sutras_of_Patanjali) from which all these techniques are derived from. Specifically it is focusing on the 7 centres of energy called Chakras. The gut level thing you talk about is called the Manipura in Sanskrit or the Solar Plexus Chakra in English transliteration.
It may be stylistic. Cuban tends to opine a lot and sometimes comes across as a blowhard.

He's overexposed too. There's something about people like Gates who don't make a lot of public pronouncements. When they speak, you tend to think it's because they have something of value to say (and they generally do).

Probably doesn't hurt that they also let their work do most of the talking for them (e.g. Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation).
So less than 50%, and qualified with a specific speed minimum which is... generous, to say the least. Your own source (which was what I was looking at when I asked you for a source) disagrees with your false statement.

This also doesn't account for a variety of other ways to get Internet, which I described above, such as mobile access.
Cuban had some very smart bankers at Goldman
Not oui in French?
Which is more beneficial to society? Proof of work or entertaining people?
I suspect what caused my injuries was that I was training the muscles harder than the tendons. Eventually the tendons gave way. I could never get any solid answers from anyone about how that part of your body really works and what causes it to fail.
This is my kind of person/challenge
Why so many exotic cars have Montana license plates
This is actually a subject dealt with widely in the humanities. The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction is a good start, for instance. It does seem odd for art to be valued by the market, but there are clear ways to construct standard valuation (based on utility, etc) around it.

some computer and printer somewhere can easily reproduce the piece if I ever need it again [...] well-defined manufacturing cost

This is not as straightforward as some might think! Some people agree with you. Some don't. "Fake" is a spectrum as well. Is it a reproduction of an original work, or an original work falsely attributed to a particular artist? In the second case, if the quality is high and scholarship has emerged around that work, is it "less valuable" to own after it is revealed as fake (for one individual, not at market prices) or is it in a sense more interesting? Is it perpetrated to be real or simply a print? Even if it's an authentic creation of the artist, was the work been authorized outside of their canon in a less official way? What about photographs, and later editions of them (by either the artist themselves, their estate or family, a dealer, etc)? Check out Richard Prince and his "decertifications" of paintings.

Startups offering blockchain solutions to this landscape, of course, are emerging. But they face the same problem everyone does in that market: how can physical assets, and their movements, be indisputably registered to a blockchain?
There's also machine learning.
Discussion at the time (883 points, over 300 comments): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8658283
> Ideally you'd rotate them every 60 days.

This isn’t correct. Password rotation is a function of desired cover time (how long you want to maintain confidentiality) and password strength (approximate entropy and complexity).

If you randomly generate a password with 20+ mixed case alphanumeric characters, it’s theoretically safe against offline brute forcing attempts for more time than the universe has existed. Statistically speaking, you gain virtually nothing by rotating such passwords unless you know they’ve been compromised. On the other hand, you impose a significant security liability through usability friction.
I didn’t really take the “need it to succeed“ line seriously. That’s kind of just something people say.

Is it really that crazy to operate in one ecosystem like that? Is spreading my data over a couple massive companies somehow worth it IRL? I doubt it.
I tend to think that we'll continue to be stuck for a while, but that a fundamental breakthrough will usher in something approaching AGI. And, I don't think it will be along the lines of the relatively brute force current approaches.

So, when it finally happens, it'll move fast.
You're confusing the behavior of the device with the behavior of the HSM modules used for iCloud storage.
My computer engineering degree made us take courses in logic.

DeMorgans law was definitely a part of that.

It's also randomly useful in every day life to remember, "a implies b doesn't imply b implies a" and stuff like that.

Lol people should hear some of the debates me and my engineering friends have sometimes. It's interjected with all of this stuff.
Proof of work - as proven by the fact that this is what the resources are being spent to provide.
HN is generally very bitter. People here are quick to find faults.
When I discovered that Route53 won't healthcheck private DNS entries, I rolled my own pinger. Mine sucks. Yours is double awesome.
Often times there isn't even an alternative.

Sometimes you get lucky and there's a company with a decent privacy policy but still no end to end encryption.

There are virtually no products with "okay" full encryption and federation (eMail and torrent like protocols for sharing big files are the two I can think of).
This is a much better way to do it. It's easier, cleaner, and gets the text which is generated by templates, which there is a surprising amount of (you get weird artifacts from that otherwise).
Or one of my personal favorites, the Epistemology of Computer Simulations in Science:

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/simulations-science/#EpiC...
Yes, he's not a super genius. He's reasonably smart and good at spotting trends.

I take the advice of anyone with a huge grain of salt.
> Suppose it will take 100 years to crack your strong unique password once the file is breached. If the rotation period is 90 days, rotation gains you something.

A strong password takes billions of years to crack with current computing power, assuming an entire datacenter is coordinating offline cracking on your password in particular.
This Man Helped Peter Thiel Demolish Gawker
Yes but...password rotation doesn’t defend against that case either...so it’s irrelevant.
A while back I bumped into a friend and his family in Highlands, NC while I was out on a motorcycling day trip. Why are y'all here? Oh, the wife grew up over in Sapphire. What do kids in Sapphire do? Meth and get knocked up.

So.

C: Get pregnant.
Sardinian for yes is 'eja' which I've read is derived differently from the two methods suggested here though I haven't seen any suggestions on what that derivation might be.
That is why I said "Lisp Machine emulator" and not "Lisp Machine".

The text-buffer abstraction is the "disguise".

But I take the point that the paradigm is not quite the same.
A calque wouldn't take such a particular word as "oi". The sentence makes sense coming from oral language, where you say oi to ask for confirmation and add the rest to specify in which direction. People do say "eh que sí", which, cal que or not, follows the same pattern, and even "a que sí", which definitely copies the Spanish expression.
As I am reading your comments more, it seems like you just don't understand this trifecta of software engineering, security, and economics. All blockchains that run code on untrusted nodes have the extremely difficult problem of securely verifying other nodes transactions which usually devolve into solutions that solve O(constant) problems on O(N) nodes with N/2 majority consensus governing the network. That is literally the worst solution you can come up with in computer science because it does not scale whatsoever.

Contrast this with running code on nodes you trust which scales linearly and you should be able to see why everyone says blockchains are a solution in search of a problem.

> "I know it would be better to have a tech that consumes less energy, but I also understand why it's not a trivial issue, because physics and economics."

So thus I ask, what "physics and economic" problems do blockchains solve better than current solutions bar illegal markets?
Yea... when the author started complaining about Peercoin and that somehow being related to what Ethereum is working on today... he lost all credibility with myself at least.
I believe this is the important part of his argument:

"If any cryptosystem is to periodically release coins, without immediately creating an incentive to “waste” an amount equal to the value of those coins, the cryptosystem is going to have to release the coins in a manner which is totally independent of all possible human activities."

And he's absolutely right. When you break it down all cryptos need to waste an amount of resources equal to the value produced by the coins. In bitcoin it's mining equipment and electricity but there's another coin which is setup to use these resources more efficiently than BTC or ETH.

EOS is releasing as a dPoS blockchain which converts the energy the 'miners' (block producers) use in a way that's beneficial for the users (server and network resources). It still expends resources, but does so in a non wasteful manner.
This is a new low. They have no shame.
I don’t know if this really means anything. Cody’sLab has received something like two strikes for purely educational content on YouTube.

I mean I feel like Alex’s general message is pretty absurd but at the end of the day he’s just making money through his supplement company right? No different than a lot of channels right now..

If anyone is interested in seeing what Alex is like when his guard is down and he’s had a few puffs off of a joint, I highly recommend episode #911 of the Joe Rogan Experience. Gave me a better perspective on who Alex really is.
As far as I can tell, almost all of the arguments in this piece are still valid. Is there any recent work which argues that it is possible to have something cheaper than proof of work?
The resources were spent on obvious speculation, which adds less than zero value to humans (other than speculators).

As an analogy, if resources are spent on war, I think it's not so far fetched to say that there is an extraordinary amount of waste in terms of human talent, life, physical infrastructure, and diverted resources. Just because someone spends money doesn't mean it was well spent (unless you measure such things in money).
If we only get to pick one as a society, entertaining people, hands down.

Society happily survived without proof of work for millennia, but I think it’s important to remember that entertainment is the good part of life that proof of work is ultimately supposed to enable.

I mean this in the same sense the founding fathers did when the wrote stuff like:

>“I must study politics and war that my sons may have liberty to study mathematics and philosophy.”

That is, proof of work is the tradeoff that ultimately should enable people’s personal entertainment and happiness.

If more of the former means less of the latter, I think we are in a bad way.
Goroutines and Channels Aren't Free
The buzz may also continue to increase. The power of even limited narrow AI is only starting to show.
> Given that the Supreme Court has previously upheld both of the FCC’s classifications of broadband under the Telecommunications Act of 1996, first as an “information service” and then as a “telecommunications service” (when Wheeler reclassified it to impose net neutrality), there is no way that they will strike down a return to the “information service” classification.

When was the telecommunications service classification upheld by the Supreme Court. Last I remember is that there were some petitions asking the Court to look at it, but I don't recall the Court agreeing to do so, let alone actually ruling, and Google is not turning up anything.
So if China demands the key, Apple will pull out of China?
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/11/02/apple-china-revenue-up.html
~$10 Billion last quarter of 2017
If you read the article, this is a pattern in a number of languages, so there's no reason for it to come from French. It's also unlikely because the pronunciation is very different: https://forvo.com/word/oi/#ca
not saying value is right or wrong. but that is the present value of a stock award that vests over time. this is valuing his expected contribution and whatever it took to get him to join versus previous company / other opportunities. to be paid out over 4 years.
> I'm talking about automated password rotation. A new 128-bit* random base64 password every month.
Rotating credentials is important, even if you automate them.*

To be clear, you’re aware how absurdly long it would take to complete offline cracking for a single, randomly generated, 128-bit password, right? From a purely statistical perspective, what you’re advocating doesn’t actually make sense. It can only impose usability friction.

Unless you know a site’s password database has been compromised, you shouldn’t change the password. If it has been compromised, your password is so strong that you could honestly let just about every computer in the world try to crack it and still be reasonably confident in its continued security.

Password managers empower you to do that, but with a different password for every single service you use. You set it and forget it because you don’t have to do anything else. Simpler is better for users.

> For the same reason that Let's Encrypt only provides certificates with 90 days validity

I’m sorry, but no. This is utterly dissimilar to personal passwords. Public key certificates have limited validity because digital signatures cannot be revoked offline. The entire premise of a digital signature scheme and PKI is that you default distrust. Therefore, signers must renew instead of revoke, like a dead man’s switch. It doesn’t make sense to use this principle as a comparison for password security, because passwords are a secret used for access control, not authentication in the cryptographic sense of the term.

I think there is merit to the argument that public key authentication is better than passwords, but such a discussion should 1) include nuances, like the differences between authentication and access control, and 2) be mindful of cavets, especially with respect to usability. Under the current paradigm, passwords are not weak just because they do not share the same e.g. rotation characteristics as certificates, because they have very different use cases and threat models.
Yes, and relatively recently too (lots of this sort of "all languages should be Latin" nonsense is from the 1700s).

You probably know the old joke, a visitor is on the Harvard campus, and says to one of the passing students:

Visitor: Excuse me, can you tell me where the library's at?

Student: Here at Harvard, sir, we do not end a sentence with a preposition.

Visitor: I do beg your pardon. Allow me to rephrase my question. Can you tell me where the library's at, you pompous asshole?

[I mean, if one is going to make up silly rules, at least they should have enough knowledge to know that the relevant domain in which the ridiculous rule would be applied isn't the sentence, but the clause.]
DIY Biology
> EOS is releasing as a dPoS blockchain which converts the energy the 'miners' (block producers) use in a way that's beneficial for the users (server and network resources). It still expends resources, but does so in a non wasteful manner.

And how exactly does it do that?
Yea, I don't know that it does really. If anything making it more of a utility entrenches existing players.

That being said I think that net neutrality promotes competition on the internet as a whole, which I think is more impactful and positive, but in this line of thinking is probably a little besides the point.

I don't really think ending net neutrality promotes competition between broadband providers either. I think either way you have entrenched natural oligopolies, just with NN they're not getting in the way of a free and open internet.
venezuelans are literally collapsing from starvation:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2018-02-22/hungry-ve...
yus?
Shrinking the kernel with an axe
Let's just sit back and think... $4,000,000,000 in 4 years. or $50,000 for 80,000 families.

On the other hand, how come they are making 65% net margins? Where's the competition?
For what though? If I don’t have to make that conversion then what’s the point?
What I learned in two years of moving government forms online
Delivery Drones Will Mean the End of Ownership (2016)