skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
He worked backward to see what X would need to be for X to grow to 8200k in 70 years and got 72k. Under an assumption of 7% returns per year on average, which is a fair number to use for the stock market over a long period of time (over a short period of time it's usually a lot lower or a lot higher than that).
The browser ships with a pre-whitelisted list. Those sites can autoplay videos from the beginning with no user interaction, which has dramatically less friction than unwhitelisted sites which must get you to interact across 20 different visits. That is a lot of friction.

Imagine if someone makes a YouTube competitor. They won't have autoplay for an user's first 20 sessions at minimum! That's significant
I think you're maybe being too charitable with djrobstep's comment. It's an inane response to the comment it replies to. Here's the full context:

> > Especially over a 67 year period! If she saved about $10k (2018 dollars) annually for the first ten years of her working career, got ~4% after inflation, and never saved another penny that would account for ~$1.2 million of the sum by itself.

> > Buy and hold long term; reinvest dividends folks :-).

> What if I'm hit by a bus and killed the day before I retire?

It's just not responsive to the original comment and doesn't really bring up anything novel. It might be slightly more reasonable if included your elaborations, but it doesn't, and even then it's totally silly. Saving $10k/yr is not a hardship for most tech workers and does not preclude gratification in the present! $90-100k annually is still several standard deviations above median income.
The same reason why building a road isn't a subsidy. Is building a bridge from Oakland to a San Francisco a subsidy for Uber and Twitter?

You are expanding the infrastructure, without transmission lines there is no economic viability for most of our renewable energy.
"Maybe facebook should consider rolling out a 'friend finder' along with their dating feature."

Craigslist used to have a "strictly platonic" section in their personals, but it's gone now along with the rest of their personals.
I'm fully aware of that. My point is that its value is just about the same as any random sequence of bits. The fact that those bits are in a super inefficient ledger doesn't matter.
Interesting. Setting this to "Document user activation required" eliminated all autoplay for me.
> What makes bitcoin special? Nothing.

Being first is not nothing. It's called first mover advantage.

> But they mostly have one goal which is to find someone who will one day pay a lot more for the same bitcoin then they did.

Funny, you also just described VCs with that phrase. Put $1 mil in this company today in the hope of flipping it for $100 mil in two years. They also brag loudly about it, how they "exited" for many times more than they put in. I presume you also find VCs incredibly stupid and unproductive as bitcoin.
Or the rent controlled apartment lottery. A secretary now in NY in a non-rent control apartment would have $0 to put into any stocks after paying rent.
Where is vectored I/O used in practice? I'd think the requirement of using multiple buffers for scatter/gather is not very efficient...
"Document user activation required" is what you want.
Way to defend Net Neutrality there, by picking which sites are allowed to have certain capabilities.
Holy mixed metaphors.
He did, and both you and I thought that it was unnecessary. Not all publicity is good publicity.
> Actually it doesn't save them anything

Then why increase risk to human life if there's no benefit?
Exploring for an Exponent
Script kiddie. Nothing to be proud of, seriously.
Introducing EOSIO Dawn 4.0
This isn't even bad, lol.

What will happen is that the world will now have more and better semiconductors. Everyone wins.
I have about 20-30 people I still stay in contact with and it's super tough to schedule activities as it is. :(
The lady also worked until her 90s and died soon after her retirement. Working an extra 25 years past typical retirement age and barely drawing on principal helps also.
> And it's kind of tricky because it's a defacto part of society. I hate this hyper-scheduled hyper-data-driven stuff myself. But since the large majority of other parents do this, I can't avoid it

The problem is that this behavior is driven by a tiny monitory, and supported by the rest.

The honest answer is to be the jerk who doesn't go along with it. The only way we can stop being victim to societal trends is to go against the flow.
Not even in my wildest dreams I would have imagined that today I would have ended my day browsing Amazon for a thermal printer.
> One value of Bitcoin is in its decentralization

Gold, bread etc. have value because they can be consumed as commodities. A bitcoin can not be consumed, thus it has no utility, no use value.

Currencies (like gold) are commodities with extraordinary properties which make them good currencies. Properties on top of their base utility. Those properties are portablility, divisibility, durability and uniformity. You are saying Bitcoin has a good currency property. But it is a property of an object (a non-object actually) which has no utility.

As I said before, then people bring up the last 47 years of the dollar, but that is a whole other discussion.
My wife and I think they are fun and we know folks who've done 50+ and drive to different cities to do them. I spent a lot of time looking into the feasibility of starting my own, but the real estate cost here is too high and you need to be ready to run a brick and mortar business for a few years which is a huge leap from just freelancing.

People say they are fads, maybe, but they are essentially just another "something to do" with a group of friends or co-workers that isn't "going to a bar". If you like it, you do another one, maybe with different friends, etc. The problem is in smaller cities there are only a few rooms and you finish them all and have nothing new to do, so then they either need to reinvest to redo their rooms or they bleed and die, meanwhile in big metros 100s are popping up and shutting down constantly, and the quality spectrum is incredibly wide.

If you like point and click adventure games or hidden object style games, this is for you, gets you out of the house. If you are a game designer, they seem super fun to want to try and design and you get to hack at cool tech to build fun surprises and then delight in seeing real people be amazed by it daily, or alternatively frustrated or ripping your room apart at the hinges. Either way, seems like it'd be fun and profitable to do if you were in the right location. Even if you sold out only on weekends that's like 4 rooms * 8 slots * 4 people * $25 = $3200 * 2 days = $6400 a weekend in revenue.
That is great fucking writing.
Your contacts example is great. I recall a company who initially offered a contact list backup app, and now they pivoted to phone number search / caller ID app.
10 Shocking Repairs Eggs Do to Your Body
Gold is always used as this pillar of value when talking about currencies (one might even call it a gold standard?) but its scarcity is managed and artificially inflated like anything else and it has no intrinsic value unless you really have a burning need for jewelry, electronic contacts, or I dunno, making Goldwasser? You can't eat gold. If there was some kind of huge financial crash, people would not be lining up to barter with your gold beyond a few gullible folks who think it will bring them security. It's worth something because of scarcity and prior agreement, which is exactly why paper money or cryptocurrency have value. If anything, cryptocurrency has that scarcity embedded into its very nature.

That said, cryptocurrency currently isn't used for much more than speculation and "investment" which is a terrible way for a healthy economy to work. Unless there's a lot of conventional business being done with it, it's only a good investment if lots more investors come by and dump money into it, and those investors will only get a payout if proportionally more investors come after them, and so on... See a resemblance to a certain famous financial scam?

It'll only be legit when people use it for exchange of goods and services in a large enough density to support the investment, which is really just a parasite on a existing economy taking advantage of pricing inefficiencies. You can't have investment and speculation first. A parasite can't live off itself. And so far the only exchange of goods and services is a few people buying psychedelics and a few people making various over-hyped decentralized apps. Oh, and a few people making ransomware. It's not very encouraging.

Hopefully a truly huge decentralized application comes along that makes good, sustainable use of blockchain, but until then--it's starting to look very pyramid-shaped to me.
> we know from many years of experience what an internet forum turns into when people respond to others with "Give me a few minutes to recover from laughing, please. Impenetrable. Lololololol." and similar.

Fair point. It doesn't move the conversation forward in any useful way.

I'll keep my comments tuned to further a debate, and not just react aimlessly.

I'll also refresh on the guidelines.
If you've been to a mystery dinner theater, it's the same general principle, a group of people get together to solve a mystery. One is escaping a room, the other is questioning actors to solve a crime. It's just the escape rooms get rid of the actors and dinner parts and focus more on props.

As for low cost, I meant to start one. Service-based, low amount of employees, not much need for location if you focus on appointments, etc.
Those errors are always related with a bad implementation where there is something holding a reference to the qt python object represented by the bidding therefore keeping it alive even when their c++ instance has been already deleted. The solution is to go back to the drawing board and improve the implementation :)
What do you use for CI/CD?
Seattle here. Most of the junior roles seem to be subcontracting around here. Unless you can get a referral, you're probably getting ghosted.
That math really doesn’t work - $6,300 67 years ago (1951) in today’s money would be $61,478.82 (https://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm).

She would definitely have to do well in the market, but I wonder what her earnings looked like as well over time - Cleary Gottlieb is a VERY successful law firm. If there was any kind of profit sharing or other incentives, it could have been fairly lucrative. Stock would have been better, but still.
> A typical figure for a 15 year mission was a 75% chance of it making it the whole way, including launch. It's checked to an extreme degree. I've had people come back and correct an un-dotted 'i' symbol in a handwritten notebook. Really.

Can you break down this calculation? Where did 75% come from? I think your parent poster's point is this: no one really knows where these numbers are coming from.
I’d go one step further - if the SO people were actually smart, they would have implemented a page rank type system that leveraged the scores of the responses to any question.

Sorry for my bad attitude, but their “off topic” crap comes up so often on searches that I wonder why they ever ran an openly searchable system as opposed to a walled garden. SO, like AOL for egos.
At some intuitive level this problem reminded me of other very different puzzles like [1] and prompted me to wonder if as a general rule the best tactic when one is faced by a riddle that appears impossible, is to try to think of solutions that involve self reference. It also makes me wonder if the brain at a basal unconscious level uses something analogous to the linked list like solution described here to quickly explore permutation space.

1 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knights_and_Knaves
Of course Japan's Nikkei index is still well below its peak in 1989. It isn't smart to assume that 7% will continue forever, particularly since developed economies' growth rates have all slowed, and without massive immigration slowed demographic growth makes it unlikely the rates will increase again.

In any case, if you believe your charitable donations are better off invested in the stock market than being put to charitable work today, then why bother donating? That means you don't believe in the charity. It would be better to find a more effective charity!
You can just host the git repo itself though if you know very specifically what repo(s) you want. A clear advantage of distributed version control is that each person has their own repo. You can give access via ssh or http I think (only tried ssh tho).
VC's can't "flip" a company for $100M unless that company is actually valued at $100M.

VCs invest in a team and an idea that they believe will build that company. This is why they are productive (as opposed to bitcoin).

The way companies are valued, in general, is by their discounted cash flow. That is the only way you can sell a company for $100M is if you convince someone that company's business will earn at least $100M in present value (typically a lot more).

This is exactly the difference between investment and speculation.

EDIT: VC's don't need someone to pay more. They need a good business. It's true they're generally interested in selling those businesses but they might stay an owner for a very long time if it's a great business. It's not the other people who pay their money that makes VC's money, it's the business creating value. As to their motivation, of course it is partly to make more money through investment, but they don't rely on a bigger fool to succeed.
It feels pointlessly complicated to me, the IDE version of picodollars. Their pricing is already a great value and I'd happily pay them a premium not to ever have to look at another weird 'perpetual fallback' Gantt chart.
no you're missing my point: they don't pay themselves at all so their margins are inflated.
> You can't have investment and speculation first.

Do you know how a power plant is built today? You buy future contracts of gas, you sell future contracts of electricity (more expensive) and you use the profit from this transaction to build a power plant which will convert the gas that will be delivered to you in electricity that you must be delivering. I'm not joking.
I think the killer app of the monad is really the language feature that Haskell has called "do notation". This is where it really shines. You can definitely use the monad interface in other languages, but it can feel clunky and unintuitive sometimes because you end up either foregoing some of the effectiveness to better fit the language, or you end up in essentially callback hell. Example:

In Haskell, you can use do notation:

do
x <- someFunction
y <- anotherFunction x
z <- yetOneMoreFunction y x
return (x + y + z)

This is syntactic sugar for something like (using `flatMap` in place of >>= (bind) ):

flatMap someFunction (\x ->
anotherFunction x (\y ->
yetOneMoreFunction y x -> (\z ->
return (x + y + z)
)
)
)

If Haskell programmers had to write code like this (which is what monads look like in other languages), there's no way they would use monads!

In languages with objects, you can sometimes get away a minor victory by using what I'll call a "shallow bind". Consider promises in javascript (which form a monad with unit a = Promise.resolve(a) and flatMap p f = p.then(f) ):

someHttpRequest().then( response => {
if (response.body == undefined) {
return Promise.reject("no body error");
} else {
return Promise.resolve(response.body);
}
}).then(body => {
try {
return Promise.resolve(JSON.parse(body));
} catch (e) {
return Promise.reject(e);
}
}).then(parsed => {
if (parsed.status == undefined) {
return Promise.reject("no status");
} else if (parsed.status == 500) {
return Promise.reject("server failure");
} else {
return Promise.resolve(data);
}
// what would you do if you decided you wanted to reference `response` here somewhere?
});

This is definitely an improvement over a deeply nested callback style from 10 years ago, but it does sacrifice some flexibility. You can't refer to previously handled promises because the callbacks are shallow. You can do that with do-notation, and that's what makes the concept of monads stick in Haskell.

Once you have that, and in Haskell, it's amazingly implemented as an overloadable piece of syntax, the doors are wide open. Example: at my work, we use free monads to get a similar effect as dependency injection in other languages (clean separation of concerns, easy mocking, etc) but with two huge benefits: 1. Any function is limited to using only the dependencies/effects you allow it to, it won't type check if you try to sneak something in, and 2. Because of the overloadable syntax, we use it to collect timing info on all of our operations that are doing IO in a way where we get a flame graph style hierarchy of effects _for free_. We never have to specify when to start and a stop the timers, the syntax knows when to. It's pretty powerful.
Looks like Cuomo vetoed it, twice:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/24/nyregion/gravity-knife-cu...
This excerpt is wonderful. Thanks so much for sharing.
Ive never read anyone that has had even a mildly successful experience let alone a bad one with the SNOO. That makes me suspicious. Even more so is the lack of any sort of study backing this stuff up. It all looks like snake oil to me.
That's not true, you only get to that figure with 5,000 nominal dollars and 6.2% unadjusted interest

>>> def comp(s, n, i):
... m = 0
... for x in range(n):
... m *= i
... m += s
... return m
...
>>> comp(5000, 77, 1.062)
8201943.704759633

So there were some abnormal returns (or inheritance) involved.
>You can decentralize without blockchain and proof of work.

Yes, but by using blockchain and proof of work we strive to create a system where centralization is the primary state as a result of mathematic equations and game theory. It doesn't need a higher force to govern it. It's inbuilt.

Ahh, so you more have a fight with Bitcoin, rather than crypto in general?

If you're looking for what makes Bitcoin special, the answer is Time.

Time has allowed it to have many many man-hours of development worked poured into it, improving it, making it more resistant. Throughout the years multiple inefficiencies have been removed, and security breaches have been fixed. This is an advantage.

Time has allowed its community to spread and grow, building into a powerful decentralized network. Do not underestimate the power of network effects.

Time has molded its name into the eyes of people and into the history of the world. Everyone has heard of bitcoin. This is incredibly powerful. (Can also be argued to be a negative point though)

You bring up miners as an example of bitcoin having no value, yet that is exactly where the value is. Decentralised mining is how bitcoin keeps its core value of being decentralized. The miners are thus being paid to upkeep this feature. Miners don't need to speculate on the value of Bitcoin, their profits in the long run will be equal to the value of this feature.
New OS versions (especially from Apple) regularly create new bugs or completely break compatibility with old software. The cost of upkeep is not entirely predictable and easy to "price-in" to the upfront cost.
the interesting thing about crypto is that it allows for diversified speculation/investment in the equivalent of the oil drillers to gas station owners.

I have not found a comparable analogy. The problem is that btc or eth may not correlate with long-term crypto growth bc they may start a trend, but another similar tech may actually be the winner. Its interesting and I hope that people dont take too large of a personal position in the asset class as a % of total investments.

[Disclaimet] I currently 'invest' a small sum of money monthly in crypto assets. (Less than 1% of my portfolio monthly allocation)
I was talking about motivation.

Why do the vast majority of VCs "invest"? Profit.

Why do the vast majority of people buy cryptos? Profit.

If you attack bitcoin buyers for wanting to get rich, you should feel the same about VCs.
Japan now appears to be a special case (also what about dividends reinvested?)... But by all means, diversify. I admit to not having a crystal ball.

As to putting money to charity today I agree that might be a better idea.

[EDIT: Even with dividends this particular time period in Japan yielded terrible returns. Investing in the stock market for long periods doesn't guarantee returns, nothing does, but it's a pretty good probability.]
Would golang count?
I did not bring global temperatures into the discussion as I don't believe they pose as serious a threat as increased CO2 levels. Wikipedia has a nice graph showing estimated global average temperatures over time https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:All_palaeotemps.svg . Please note the log-time scale.

The graph shows that between 10-250 million years ago, global temperatures were 1-12° C higher than they are today. Given that current projections, which include the 2% relative gain in solar irradiance, expect 3-4°C warming by 2100, the geologic temperature record suggests such increases are not detrimental to life on earth. Let us recall that life was thriving during the Jurassic and Cretaceous periods, when temperatures were 5-10°C higher and CO2 levels between 1000-2000ppm. Global temperatures today are actually lower than than average, on a geological timescale.

>the rate of change in CO2 levels was never nearly this swift

No, you can't conclude this. You cannot show there was no other a period in Earth's geologic history where CO2 levels rose by 150ppm (or 150%, whichever is not relevant) in less than 200 years. The geologic record is not detailed enough to make such a claim. It is unknowable if there was a series of major volcanic eruptions that caused CO2 levels to rise rapidly.

And sudden change has always been a part of climate and evolution. Rapid change can occur in just a few decades. For example, the Sahara wasn't even a desert 10,000 years ago. Also see punctuated equilibrium.
Thing is, that aluminum industry in your example existed before the investment and independent from the investment. People need aluminum and are going to buy it.

If you have a signal to purchase more currency, and that currency's value only goes up if more people show up to buy it at a higher price, and those people can only get a payout if another tier of people show up and pay a higher price... See the shape of that structure? Vaguely... triangular?

Legitimate investment takes advantages of inefficiencies in pricing. It's not possible to always sell a commodity at the absolute ideal and correct price at the correct time, especially for an industry just getting its start. So people with a lot of assets can take some commodity, hold it for a period of time, then sell it wisely to take advantage of an existing industry. Or nurture it and reap the rewards when it is successful. See how cryptocurrency is potentially different? Most of the price of crypto is not supported by any industry. It's people buying more in hopes of getting rich quick. It's absolutely a bubble in its current incarnation, although hopefully it develops a more diverse underpinning as time goes on.

If it develops that foundation then it will be like investing in a fledgeling industry, nurturing it until it can become self-sustaining and profitable. If those applications don't come through, it's just another scheme.