skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
What? For this system to be truely trustless, the blockchain needs to be owned and maintained by all the people who use it. That means farmer, carrot juice guy, distributor, and retailer need to all have beefy computers with large hard drives to hold the entire blockchain and keep mining it.

Sure, it's great that you don't have to trust Amazon or Wal-Mart to trace the links back, but you could do just as well way more cheaply with a well-maintained independent 3rd-party with an AJAX API on top of a Postgres database. (Well, except for the part where said 3rd-party gets bought out by Twitter...)
Are you sure that’s a problem? Doesn’t seem to be. Moreover blockchain doesn’t solve it.
This.
I'm legitimately scared when random guys approach me, as I've had guys grope me, try to corner me, etc in past. Sadly, I feel like these are common experiences for women.
Thanks for this link! I'm learning a lot that I never really even knew to know about.

It's a mess. It's probably the best mess they could put together - but it's still a mess.
It’s a nice write up and the part on system call interception is only serving as an example, but be careful if you’re considering ptrace in something where security matters.

See the answer on https://stackoverflow.com/questions/4414605/how-can-linux-pt... for an example of a potential race. I believe OpenBSD’s systrace had some issues like this.
Well, that is because you get a copy of your email on your machine, so don't have to worry about losing the account as much, and you have offline access.
The employment status of a soldier is very different than an at-will employee, not to mention the differing nature of the work...
> I'd like to see how any international traffic is being sent through a land-locked city like Dallas...

Well, Texas borders Mexico, and although DFW is on the other side of the state, it is a very large metro area. If it's a hub for domestic traffic, it seems logical for it to also act as an interchange for international traffic with Central and South America. The hostnames I see in a traceroute to telmex.com (a big telco headquartered in Mexico City) from my office in New England on Verizon FiOS appears to support the idea that at least some traffic routes through Dallas before it crosses the border.

EDIT: clarification
> 1.

"Open APIs", backing and sharing data is all possible without Blockchain.

> 2.

The problem with contracts isn't contract itself, but the humans involved. Instead of having a lawyer write a contract, instead you'll have Smart Lawyers write Smart Contracts.

> 3.

Ok, sure. I would like to see what this is in practice though. The reason payment processors don't like dealing with adult industries is due to the higher rate of fraud and/or chargebacks, things like that. Either processors involved would be affected by the same things, or consumers would have to forgo things like fraud prevention and protection.

> 4.

Stackoverflow data is Creative Commons. If those sites go down we wouldn't loose the information. This is not a real problem.

> 5.

You detailed yourself why this isn't actually a problem solved.

> 6.

How? You can't just say "voting, but on the blockchain" and leave it at that. Wouldn't a voting-only blockchain would be susceptible to 51% attacks?
Were you in the 509th PIR?
> I would love to know which societal problems can be reduced to a distributed trust problem.

Election fraud.
Love the concept, a cool app really !
Filecoin, Bluzelle, Sia, Genaro, Arweave, are projects that try to solve trustless decentralized storage. Most use blockchain as the incentive and accountability layer only, files aren't stored directly on the blockchain. (Of these projects, only Sia is currently live)
Ok, well now the question becomes “what problems can only be solved with distributed trust?”

I think most people don’t trust most (other) people, so few practical applications will arise.
Six figures is the top earners at the top restaurants, for sure.
The sense in which I meant it was: in the course of a termination, the employee is being deprived, by another person, of something. The latter person sets in motion the process. That's one way to figure out who is the accuser and who is the accused, because in the framework of the law, we are not to deprive another person of rights or possessions without demonstrating they have done wrong.
Judges Barnes' Appeals court dissent is perplexing:

> “I am keenly aware of the overreach some law enforcement agencies have exercised in some of these cases,” Judge Barnes wrote. “Entire family farms are sometimes forfeited based on one family member’s conduct, or exorbitant amounts of money are seized. However, it seems to me that one who deals heroin, and there is no doubt from the record we are talking about a dealer, must and should suffer the legal consequences to which he exposes himself.”

---

He's, of course, well aware that the Land Rover is worth far more than the maximum fine was for the crime, so that's not what he meant by "the legal consequences to which he exposes himself". The only thing I can figure that he means is basically "tough luck, forfeiture exists on the books, you've exposed yourself to it, that's your bad." But saying "the law allows it" is hardly helpful when the issue at hand is (apparently) whether or not the law is constitutional. The only thing I can think is he felt his opinion was on the narrow facts of the case and not the broader constitutionality, or that case law had already settled this.
>Venezuela is irrelevant (..)

so are your thoughts about Bitcoin from their (those whose lives were saved because of cryptos) point of view, obviously.

>Besides they are using USD

A few may. But in such violent place, saving cryptos is cheaper than saving in any (physical) cash. Easier to trade as well, since banking is not THAT accessible and illegal USD trading have its safety's costs.

>bitcoin doesn't solve a single systemic problem Venezuela has.

all fiat is a systemic problem. According to Austrian School of Economics. Don't get me wrong, I'm not appealing to authority or anything. This is not meant for you.
Someone might read our comments, care to actually know what's going on and look further into it.
Again, where is the problem? If you want to send money to your child on their birthday, just send it. Why do you need a contract, 'smart' or otherwise, for that?

Edit: What's funny about that thread is that it's someone asking for help to get a contract written (...like you do when you see a lawyer), and there's supposedly (or not, unsure about the sarcasm) a venerability in the contract itself.
In other words, you think that the blockchain setup is more trust _worthy_ than political accountability. That's fine (if not my cup of tea). My point was that you're still extending the same amount of trust; i.e. you have to accept things without direct proof in an environment that may attempt to manipulate you for its own benefit.

It's worth considering what these things are. What you essentially want is:

- There should be a limited total amount of money

- Iff people want to give money to somebody else in exchange for something, they should be able to do so in a timely fashion

- People should only be able to give away their money

- There should be no possibility of double-spending.

- People should generally be willing to accept money for things you want at a stable rate.

Given that you cannot personally examine every transaction ever made and ask people if they _really_ wanted to do that at the time, and that you also cannot control what people want, where does the abstraction you use start leaking?
> I just don't think that tritium availability lies on the critical path of unsolved problems for industrial fusion power.

Well.

https://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=Sa...

http://fti.neep.wisc.edu/pdf/fdm1273.pdf

M.E. Sawan and M.A. Abdou, "Physics and Technology Conditions for Attaining Tritium Self-Sufficiency for the D-T Fuel Cycle", Presented at the Seventh International Symposium on Fusion Nuclear Technology, May
22-27, 2005, Tokyo, Japan; to be published in
Fusion Engineering and Design.

Abstract + conclusions:

"There is no practical external source of tritium for fusion energy development beyond ITER and all subsequent fusion systems have to breed their own tritium. To ensure tritium self-sufficiency, the calculated achievable tritium breeding ratio (TBR) should be equal to or greater than the required TBR. The potential of achieving tritium self-sufficiency depends on many system physics and technology parameters.
[...] It is clear from the above discussion that both
the required and achievable TBR values depend on many system physics and technology parameters. Many of these parameters are not yet well defined. In addition, the
rapidly decreasing tritium resources imply that the time window for the availability of tritium to supply fuel for the DT physics devices is closing rapidly. It is, therefore, necessary to establish without delay an extensive R&D program to determine the “phase-space” of plasma, nuclear, material, and technological conditions in which tritium self-sufficiency can be attained.

[...] Tritium self-sufficiency in DT fusion
systems cannot be assured unless specific plasma and technology conditions are met.
[...]
Its fun! Also maddening, in the "this is computation in a totally different paradigm" way.

But Maybe as an example is one of those things that show you there are better ways than NULL.
I’ve been noodling a little with ML for infosec and if I spent an hour with a pro I might wind up doing the same thing.

The problem is likely to be one of a cacophony of choice. It’s not that they don’t have any problems, it’s that they have a million of them and have no solid footing from which to frame their answer in the form of a question.

I bet if you picked one field in one dataset and started drilling down into how they could possibly use it, the use cases will start to melt out of their frozen brains.

Get ready.
https://www.mongodb.com/blog/post/integrating-mongodb-atlas-... - private spaces works.
https://blog.joinmastodon.org/ lists 25.6.18 as the date.
> Is that a trend?

It feels like it - but I don't have a scatter plot that I can provide to prove it.

Snowden revelations felt like the start of the wave of awareness, at least amongst those with even just a modicum of interest and savvy.

In AU we tend to follow the trends (no matter how bad they are) set by other regimes. Two recent examples spring to mind. In 2017 a fairly horrific data retention law was passed that requires all ISP's to record and retain (for two years) all user meta data. In 2016 the AU Bureau of Statistics ran the latest census - there was a significant policy change regarding the long-term retention of these PII data, cynically announced a few days before Christmas the previous year (a profoundly quiet time in AU as most take their summer holidays around then).

Watching news from the UK and the US - but less so the EU, at least - is discouraging in terms of the continued eroding of privacy and freedom. Separating large institutions such as FB / Google / Microsoft from nation states misses the point - their interests more often align with each other than with their citizenry / customers(products).

> More generally, for all the 'consumption' Facebook and Instagram, you also have Arduino and 'maker' culture ...

I love the arduino, but I don't think it's going to save us from the activities of bad actors.

> I certainly see the merit in the 'Wu' observation, but it strikes me how robust and resistance the internet is -- has been -- to this erosion.

Read the book. There's a trend of people thinking 'this is how it will always be' discovering later, too late, that that's not the case.
I’m surprised that you are 50+ and are saying 15-20% “has always” been the standard for sit down full service. I am 40+ and distinctly remember when it was 10%. Then little by little it seemed to morph into 10-15%, then 10%ers were seen as cheap and it was 15%. Then some restaurants would “suggest” 15-18%. Now, just yesterday I was in a restaurant where they pre-calculated 18%, 19%, and 20%. It’s been inflating all my life, for no logical, discernible reason.
I'm worried that this will just train people to start blindly clicking through "pwned password" modal dialogs for CVVs and OTP/SMS 2FA codes, just like they did for the "Do you want to view only the webpage content that was delivered securely?" dialog in MSIE.
What was not clear from your earlier comment, and is now, is that when you say AI you don't mean AI as is practiced by most of academia and the industry but the vision of Artificial General Intelligence (AGI). If so, yes, that's a good point to make. However, it is debatable whether the path of statistical learning wont lead to AGI, or is not how our brains function, or the truth partly does comprise of statistical learning and part of something else. The Norvig-Chomsky debate is an example of the arguments on both sides.
It's a lightbox-infested mess that badly reimplements browser features like "tabs" and "back button" with so much needless JS that my laptop's fan goes to 100% of rated RPM.

Also the design takes up lots of screen real-estate with cutesy useless features.

Compare the traditional UI: http://tinyimg.io/i/nBQo9uw.png

with the ugly lightboxed replacement: http://tinyimg.io/i/rOS8oVI.png
People will ultimately work for their minimum survivable wage and economies will adjust to support ever decreasing wages among a subset of the population.
People live in favelas in Rio. They live in tiny, one room flats in Hong Kong without plumbing in deplorable conditions. They live in 'work camps' in Dubai without any rights at all.
And they work hard.

You just used examples of places for which a tiny one-room flat is an improvement over previous conditions. If you think a favela is bad, try being a peasant on a working farm.

The idea that people used to life in, for example, Texas or London will get used to a similar lifestyle which represents a massive downgrade is ridiculous. Historically people started overthrowing governments and sending people to guillotines for more modest losses. You’d have riots in SF if the options were “work for $1” or “starve.”

I think minimum wage laws are a good idea too, but your argument is bizarre.
and also failed to register all versions of an ICO domain

Surely that's just not feasible these days with the massive amount of TLD's available.

I've been in businesses that wanted to own domain.com, domain.net, domain.org, domain.co.uk, domain.com.au, et al and it was a "vulnerability" if you missed one. But with hundreds of TLDs and some costing hundreds of dollars a registration, this has to be seen as a lost battle.
Matt and jotaen, email me if you want to try out some changes I've made to Hugo that make it simple and easy without losing any power.
Vagrant runs a VM per app. Sometimes more. Big difference.
> Article states that both the Land Rover and the drugs were purchased using the payout from a life insurance policy. It is unclear whether any of the drugs were ever sold at a premium over the original purchase price.

Money is fungible, so I would be sympathetic to an argument that claimed he had made in the vicinity of $40k from selling drugs (which could not be confiscated for whatever reason, maybe he spent it all on drugs for his own use or something) and so it was justified to seize his car.

But from the way it's described, I don't see why the state doesn't think it can justify confiscating an arbitrarily large amount of property from a person who has committed an arbitrarily small drug crime. e.g. if this guy owned a $400,000 house and sold $20 worth of drugs out of it, can they take his house?
So they essentially had to re-write the windows system files (the DLLs) to implement libc and other linux friendly stuff?
THIS PROBLEM DOES NOT NEED BLOCKCHAIN TO BE SOLVED
"If the argument is that animals are a life form that are closer form of life to humans so that's why you shouldn't eat them, I can buy that argument. ...

But that's a lot different from claiming that animals have souls/spirit/animus and plants don't"

It's not, it's pretty close to the same thing as we pragmatically view life as something beyond material.

In Scientific Materialism - you are merely a random bag of particles. There literally can be no 'life' in randomness.

By very definition, you cannot exist in those terms.

'Soul/spirit/animus' etc. are crude words we all use to describe that which animates life beyond the pure randomness of our material explanations.

Though you can try to describe life in biological terms, and it's practical ... it's has some major flaws. Surely, after 4 decades of Star Trek we can all cognize forms of life which don't fit our classical biological view. More abstract notions of life would therefore have to be designed and they inch closer and closer to a metaphysical perspective that just doesn't work as Materialism.

So, if you consider the word 'Soul' to mean some concrete idea, but which is totally imaginary, like 'some God' or whatever, then sure - I see your point - but really, the existence of the terminology 'Soul/Spirit' etc. is simply grasping at something more meta, they are used to describe effectively life. Ergo - 'same scale'.

We've used and understood gravity in very crude terms for 1000's of years and yet we did not specifically understand the mechanics of it. It didn't mean we were wrong so much as we just had a crude grasp of it.

Scientific Materialism is a really useful tool, but it's not a Truth. It has it's limits and these issues highlight those limits quite well.
" For example, a CRM-focused blockchain might place the business logic for managing customer relations and sales on-chain and enable competing clients to build on the protocol."

If I'm making a CRM, why do I want this?

"A CRM built in this way might enable multiple "thin clients" to build and an ecosystem to develop around it."

Ok. How do I, the CRM maker, make money off this?
Real wage increases tie to rising productivity.

Or at least it's supposed to, but some think it has become decoupled:

https://www.epi.org/productivity-pay-gap/
> Anyone who takes the stance that containers are better than X/Y/Z are just showing that they don't have the drive to get into the why of how it all works.

... or they know exactly how it all works because they've been through hell back & forth several times and are now happy to have a system available that solves many little nerve-wracking problems.
I cannot think of a single a mass-market problem, which a blockchain tries to solve, which can't be implemented more elegantly and efficiently WITHOUT a blockchain!
There are also the performers that do very well, compared to the vast swaths of starving artist types.

If there is a minimum wage, no field should have an exception for it; that includes the labor working at places that aren't having a busy night with expensive meals.

This is also about benefiting the customers; simple transparent pricing. No variable things added later. I also want /taxes/ to be included in the advertised price (at least on the local menus; national / widely targeted ads should include large text disclaimers)
Uh.... oh it is. It's an old one. There are at least a dozen parties and counterparties involved in most trade because of currency, political, legal, and delivery risks.

You, your trade partner, your bank, your bank's correspondence bank, their bank, their bank's correspondence bank, customs at ports of entry, shipping agents, and others, and they're all taking their time and their cut to manage your risks for you.

I don't think blockchain solves anything remotely close to all problems but I think it could have its uses in providing services for escrow and a gigantic, tamper-proof distributed log.
how are economic theorists ranked?
I would question the viability of a decentralized uber when non-idealistic consumers need to use it. In a decentralized uber where do consumers go if they feel that they were charged in error, or their driver took too long of a route, or... It's not enough for a lot of people to just give someone bad feedback, they want to know that there's a (hopefully) reasonable human on the other end that they can reach out to in case things go sideways.
The whole premise of "right to work" is questionable because the employer and the employee are not equals. All else being equal, the employer has a big upper hand in any negotiation.
I’m not judging the validity of rights, I’m examining the practicality of embracing those rights up to their logical extremes. I didn’t despute the right to self defense, I just pointed out that as written by the person I replied to, it coils just as easily be applied to tanks and rocket launchers.

It’s possible to be far more permissive with freedom of speech than it is with free access to modern weaponry.
I'm pretty sure drivers don't get to see your tip until after they have rated you.
You could find a way to associate someone's activity with positive signals, like give them credits for generating positive value in the network.

Detecting positive value is difficult though.
"Sure, it seems like a strange time to be worried about recession. Unemployment is at an 18-year low, corporate investment is picking up steam, and consumer spending shows signs of rebounding."

Isn't that always the best time to be worried about recession?
Hence why its based on cash tips
Your conclusion is fair, but at the same time, a certain number of these "minor variations" will one day be assembled into something just as revolutionary as Bitcoin and Ethereum were.

If I had to guess I'd say some technology made out of the combination of blockchain, ZK-snarks, and an homomorphic computation enabler such as SGX enclaves, will probably be very disruptive to many many fields.
Most of the world has been reducing tariffs and bringing in free trade agreements like NAFTA, the EU single market, the almost passed Trans-Pacific Partnership and so on. Trump is kind of unique in recent times going the other way.
I was offered a PIP once. It was purportedly due to poor performance, but it was clear that I was being gotten rid of for other, non performance-related reasons. The actual goal I was meant to meet was unachievable because I was simultaneously throttled in the amount of work I was allowed to take on at once.

The whole place was a clown show that I was unhappy at anyway, so while I entertained the idea of taking them to court, when I realized the PIP is basically an elaborate attempt to defend against wrongful termination cases I ultimately just found a much better job.
How would Heller vs. DC have incorporated anything? DC is a federal district; there were no states involved in that case.
Wait, if the blockchain isn't storing the customer data, then what's the point of it? Exactly what is it doing?

"They can be private sidechains that occasionally interact with the main chain."

Again, why do I want any of my business logic interacting with the public at any time?

"Why would you? Because it allows communities of smaller open-source contributors to effectively compete with big, established players."

But as the maker of the CRM, why do I want this?

"Also, through crypto, you could incentivize domain experts to contribute to the business logic rules."

How? Literally how? Like, those two things are completely orthogonal.
How does it tamper-proof better than existing solutions?
If you compare energy per calculation intel server processors readily beat ARM server processors. When under constant high load, intel processors surely aren't bad in regards to power consumption. So that can't be it.

Maybe it's more about peak performance vs. average power consumption under very low load as you usually have in a mobile phone that's only used occasionally. For example when starting an app and scrolling you need very high performance but the rest of the time the CPUs are mostly idling.
Internet Download Manager 6.31 Build 2 Crack with Patch [Serial Key]