skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
As others have noted, solar radiation management doesn't do anything to counteract ocean acidification. I still think that SRM of some sort may be necessary to stop runaway feedback loops like loss of soil carbon from thawing permafrost.

The sunshade approach to SRM looks like it may have been devised like other big speculative space projects: "start by assuming that big projects in space are the solution, then find a problem to motivate that solution." (See also: mining helium 3 from the Moon.)

Solar radiation management with reflective aerosols instead of space sunshades looks simpler and easier to me. Most importantly, SRM based on aerosols is incrementally scalable from small low initial investment/scope. The sunshade approach, like many envisioned large space projects, appears to require large "lumpy" investments before delivering any detectable benefit.
What's really depressing is that I can't tell if you're joking or not.
I don't know what to tell you other than that the mechanisms I'm talking about that protect companies like Google have done more to directly protect smaller companies from these same attacks than DNSSEC has in the 24(!) years(!) Internet standards people have been working on it.
I think those buying advertising know that the ad networks' metrics are hopelessly broken, that fraud is rampant, and that their actual impressions are far less than reported. But the problem is pervasive and spans the entire ad industry, so what are they to do, other than throw in as much money as possible and hope for the best?

I recently saw a comment (can't remember where) from someone involved in an advertising startup ostensibly focused on serving unintrusive ads with accurate reporting, and the response has been overwhelmingly positive: ad buyers expressed profound relief at seeing ad metrics that actually made sense.

I don't think we can make too many assumptions about how spending would change if ad metrics were actually accurate, simply because the current metrics are so bad, and the impressions so fraudulent, that the current ad spending is largely uninformed. If the metrics were accurate, ad buyers might very well end up spending less while getting more for their money, because they can suddenly make informed decisions.
I'm always curious how exactly the fraud detection happens. Is Pixalate doing network analysis? App Analysis? Could I do the same thing myself with wireshark on my home network?
I fell for Facebook fake news. Here’s why millions of you did, too
I don't think what you describing is a startup. Most definitions point to pre-sustainability while a company searches for a path to sustainability (meaning it's reliant on itself, not outside funding). Just because it has code in it doesn't mean it's a startup necessarily.

That said, even what you're describing requires sales. Sales is just persuasion with agreement resulting in a transaction.
I don't see how this won't result in rebuilding the current regulated banking system on top of an inefficient system bottlenecked by proof-of-work.
Say I’ve developed (taught) an image - full of useful stuff. Now a new version of Pharo comes out. How do I move that stuff to the new version?
"Rysnc and cron"
rsync combined with some sort of cron or filesystem event watcher?
If your phone is under warranty, you'd potentially also need to opt in to the phone tracking how often you've used an unsafe charger. And for how long. And it would, reasonably, void the warranty.

A valid response is for consumers to say they don't want warranties any more. But if you do want a warranty, you need to use your device with approved devices...
No, you misread. "et cetera" is latin for "and the rest"... I put that there because exchanges are all tied. A ban on one leads to a ban on another, depending on the severity of your crime.

> There's nothing preventing you from taking your BTC to some other exchange

I've already showed you that exchanges can freeze your assets, so yes they can prevent you from sending to other exchanges.

> some guy that accepts BTC for goods or services. That's the beauty of this whole decentralized thing.

If your marker for decentralization is currency adoption, then USD is the most decentralized.

I thought we were passed this whole "Bitcoin is not created by humans" meme...
I honestly consider this one of the most important computer skills, and its something you can really only get by understanding the different layers (is my prompt the os, software, which framework was it written in, a browser prompt, a website prompt, etc) and that is: what happens when i click [ok] [cancel] [x] (blankspace) etc. Its probably one of the most inconsistent experiences on a computer. One popups Ok is anothers x is anothers cancel.

Ive seen most prompts before. I know what pressing cancel or ok on each one does without thinking. And if I dont know what it does, I have to pause and figure out the consequence of each button.

And when I watch other people use computers, they will close things, and I ask them "what was that" they often respond "I dont know, I didnt ask for it, so I closed it." There seems to be a persuasive misunderstandig that dismissing a prompt will leave everything in its previous state, and that it cant make any changes.
>> I suppose the only drawback here is that they're issued from a centralized authority

> This reads in a hilarious way. Kind've like saying "I've found a perfect way to buy a car - I suppose the only drawback is that I'll actually be buying a lawn mower"

Assume bitcoins are an attempt to bring back the older technology of coins, but on the internet.

Coins are issued by a central authority, though that isn't necessarily a large part of their value. (Even when coins are made of precious metals, their standardization does increase their value somewhat over their pure value by weight.)

The problem with USDC isn't that it's issued by a central authority. That is an asset, in that it allows for a more stable value. The problem is that you can't transfer the coins without recognition from USDC. If you've got a golden dinar, you can give it to someone else no matter what the Caliph would like to say about it.
I really look forward to using improvements in parallel execution within Julia. I've been experimenting with it for years and in practice parallel execution has been fairly hacky, though it has been improving. When it works, it does seem to work quite well.
Your example has nothing to do with hate speech. Your example is fraudulent speech.
I've driven across the Lake Ponchartrain Causeway a couple times. I didn't recall it was that long. I've also driven the overseas highway many times.

I don't know if there's any truth to it, but I've heard claims that the original Seven Mile Bridge which was built on railroad trestles and was therefor very narrow had fewer fatalities than the modern bridge that replaced it. The idea was that on the old narrow bridge, drivers obeyed the speed limit and paid much better attention than on the modern wider bridge which lulled drivers into being less careful.
I thought it'd at least be a few responses before someone went for the typical "got'em" style of response that inevitably relies on Missing the Point, but I guess not.

I don't need to prove that to you. Even in your own odd request, you didn't even make the feeble attempt to pretend that you're running a popular media platform. We are talking about extremely popular platforms that inherently give credence to any view points espoused on those platforms, view points that can have far reaching effects. To give you a very specific area that we're touching on, it's internet demagoguery.

Editorialization is not censorship, nutter.
I thought that the biggest problem with the "seeding the ocean with iron" method of sequestration was not the "qualms of environmentalists" but that it turned out to sequester a lot less carbon than initially thought?
Tips on Improving FabricJS Speed
Indispensable:

https://www.amazon.com/Programming-Language-2nd-Brian-Kernig...
Okay, nevermind then. Nothing to be done.
Thinking about this is too hard!

Let's just throw in the towel folks!
The problem is as much oversight as there is they intentionally dissemble and use twisted definitions when testifying before the congressional oversight committies. In 2013 the claimed their PRISM and associated wide scale surveillance activities didn't 'collect' information about or surveil american citizens because respectively they didn't task or view the information and didn't listen in on the actual content of the conversations. It's impossible to properly oversee an organization that is that circumspect with the people overseeing them.
Did you even bother to read the article you linked to? The citations make it quite clear that the terms were synonymous, and it was multiple groups (not just the Bolsheviks) who referred to the October Bolshevik takeover as a revolution.
You would sacrifice the largest source of freshwater on earth for the climate?

EDIT: The Great Lakes are not land-locked either. They flow out to the Atlantic Ocean via the St. Lawrence River.
There is. Many people use it. Have you ever gone out of your way to examine it? Or do you just infer it based on your internal beliefs and limited experiences?
How a Colombian Drug King's Escaped Hippos Have Changed Colombian Ecosystems
One of the author here. Working on this paper was fun, one of the most interesting lessons I learned was that divergence on GPUs has dramatically fallen in cost on modern architectures.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18282489
Eh, short term stock movements are mostly based on emotion, though not as bad as Bitcoin. Longer term, the market averages toward the true value of the company.

I don't trade over the short term because I don't know what the hive mind will do, but I can do longer term analysis. I anticipate that Tesla will likely revert a bit over the week as short-term opportunists drop out.
If anyone's arguing in bad faith here, it's you. Power dynamics may lead to hate speech but they are not an intrinsic part of hate speech.
- It is illegal to bestow legal advice without being a lawyer.

This is a lie. It's perfectly fine to provide legal advice without being a lawyer. What's not fine is to offer legal advice under the guise of being a lawyer or legal professional.

For example, filling out a form in a bank, or an HR form, or a health insurance form--those are all legal documents. But the bank agent, or the HR agent, or the health insurance rep can all tell you what parts need to be filled out and how, without fear of going to jail. Why? It's not because we've excepted them from some mythical law about providing legal advice. It's because they're not claiming to be lawyers.
So, say I came to lawyer, he gave me wrong advice off the record, because wanted me bring him profit, then charged me $20k for 'legal research' with subsequent heavy litigation, what bar will do?

It is nice that there are bars, but do they make any difference?
Crypto assets are only valuable insofar as they can be exchanged for real world goods and services (mostly people seem to want US dollars). Purely crypto backed stable coins lack a stable relationship to the real world.
Hm, I see. Thanks!
Locals like to call it the "big handout." It was a boondoggle project that just showcased the fact that anyone whos connected can get a slice of the government spending pie. They should have just upgraded the central artery. There's a reason Boston is the goto example worldwide for why you don't put your highways underground.
If you'd like to fund trees, one could start buying land and start protecting trees.

Spending that money on intensive lobbying and forest advocacy in rapidly-deforesting countries could have an impact, too.

The trick, of course, is that neither of these techniques compound for the individual nor a startup. They are pure charity for the planet.
That's not how contractualism works thank God
I think he/she was looking for specific courses, but your response doesn't give specifics (which I'd love to see as well) and just points to buying courses or programs. Can you enumerate the things you've purchased and maybe even rank them by their value to you?
I think the movie overall was okay but I just could not stand the overuse of shaky-cam in it. It's like they edited it specifically to be shown in those D-Box seats. Like, I understand that rocket launches are pretty shaky endeavors, but to be using the shaky cam in the _kitchen_ was just way over the top.
Ah, the irrelevance of YC has begun.
From some of my Texan students I understand that Texas is neither a blue nor a red state. It's a "non-voting state".
But doesn't the carbon just go back into the atmosphere when the fuel is used?
I really think CO2 should be scrubbed from the air, however how would you store them then? Ideally something like solid carbon - a black solid which you could then bury. Its a lot like using energy to make coal out of air and putting it back in the mine.

But surely it makes sense to stop digging up coal in the first place.
Those are the largest [above ground] freshwater bodies on the planet. That is not a good idea.

We're going to need them.
Thus, Popper's Paradox of Tolerance.[0]

[0]https://www.goodreads.com/work/quotes/6492090-the-open-socie...
> The other thing is that even while Hillsong's and similar music is very shallow and simplistic, it is becoming increasingly difficult to perform with simple, cheap instruments. So small and poor bands like ours lose appeal against the ones in megachurches with lots of instruments, talent-pool and technology.

Generally a good song can hold up when performed on a single piano or acoustic guitar, and obviously with a singer[1]. The problem here is not you: it's the songs.

Assuming you're half competent musicians, which you sound like you are, they don't sound good when you play them, not because your instruments are cheap and your band is small, but because they don't hold up as songs. They're not strong enough to carry themselves with a simple arrangement. I suspect it's not a conscious effort but what Hillsong (and others) are doing is using an impressive production to disguise weak songs.

And even if in some cases I'm wrong, songs that require a massive production aren't necessarily that helpful to the church at large. For smaller churches, how is it useful to have songs that require 10 musicians to pull off to even a borderline acceptable standard?

Your comment about rock-punk attitude is bang on. Hillsong is the overblown self-indulgent rock music of the early-mid 1970s (I mean, think how long some of their songs go on nowadays): it is time, and over-time, for the punks to take over.

I think there's a real opportunity here for strong songwriting and simplified arrangements to win through and displace the turgid mega-productions we're being submitted to with something - at the risk of being accused of rank hipsterism - a little more authentic.

Just think how many great bands over the years have been three, four, or five pieces with no massive productions (until, perhaps, later on): The Beatles, The Rolling Stones, Jimi Hendrix Experience, Cream, Blondie, The Police, The Pretenders, The Sex Pistols, The Clash, Manic Street Preachers, Cranberries, Nirvana, Soundgarden, Garbage, U2 (yeah, I know, everybody loves to hate Bono), Metallica, AC/DC, GnR, REM, Radiohead, Paramore, and the list goes on - even Fleetwood Mac were pretty basic to start off with. I'd rather listen to any of these (and many more) than Hillsong or similar.

You can do a heck of a lot with an acoustic (or even electric) guitar or two, some percussion, and a couple of voices. If you can add a bass in there, more power to you.

[1] There are, obviously, exceptions. Queen's Bohemian Rhapsody doesn't really work as anything other than a big production. Neither does Beethoven's Ode To Joy. The interesting thing about Ode To Joy though is that, if you strip away the massive production, the tune is kind of crappy - it doesn't hold up on its own.
The ultimate uber-rich manifestation: libertarianism.
Is that really the biggest reason for forest being removed?

Are there issues with raising cattle on land with a trees spaced maybe every 10 feet or so? Does it have to do with herding the cattle? Feeding the cattle? Those I feel can be solved with technology, specifically IoT/Drones/Autonomous Bots.

It seems to me, if every livestock pasture in the world has trees every 10 feet, maybe less, it could have a pretty big impact. Combine the Apple orchard with the cattle grazing land. Use technology to efficiently operate both.

Edit: And speaking of cattle. I wonder if we can literally strap something onto the back of a cow that would be able to capture methane, burn the bio-mass, and collect everything to be retrieved later on and used/buried.
Huh, I had no idea. I very vaguely recall being told it was immersion-proof by some review or other back when I first got it.

I will make sure it is fully dry and no damage has occurred.

Thanks for letting me know, I appreciate it a lot!
Unfortunately there's no profit motive for this.
Appeals are rarely about what the law means. Most appeals are about whether the law was properly followed in the specific case at hand.

People are fallible. Just because something is simple and known doesn't mean that there won't be mistakes.
Right, and thank you for calling out that CCS is only going to be part of the solution.

Taking a wider lens, my honest opinion is I think it's going to have to be a combination of a "Cuban Missile Crisis" moment for our society, and some sort of Moore's law effect on PV or battery storage.

Taking the analogy that Climate Change is the "Nuclear Arms Race" crisis of our generation, we haven't really had an event that has resonated with the populous to take an aggressive stance that blunts economics. It's shocking but true that the events of Super Storm Sandy (285 deaths), Katerina (1,833 deaths), and Puerto Rico/Maria (2,975 deaths) haven't been enough to really move the needle in the collective consciousness. It may a true disaster, on the order of Miami being rendered uninhabitable, in order for some entity above the state level to really instantiate something like a Carbon Tax.

But once we get there, I think the bottom falling out of solar pricing between now and 2025 has enough of an economic incentive to get us to 10% renewables, whereas it gets de-risked enough for the "big money" (think: Fed-backed Capital Markets ala infrastructure spending) to come in and take over. It is true that PV manufacturing doesn't exactly map onto chip manufacturing (it's not about nano scape per se, it's more about layering absorbing levels in a way that allows full capture), but ultimately I am hopeful we can get there.

Lastly ... solar is ultimately a empowering technology, in that anyone with land can use it. It's a perfect fit for a country where the laws were originally meant for a farming population (which is essentially what solar is). I think once a tipping point gets hit where gas prices stay between where they are now (maximum shale extraction cost) and ~$30 (when the Saudis start pumping), and solar goes below that, the discussion will be more around how many DC lines do we need to get electricity from the southwest to the rust belt, than whether renewables are what will save us from our energy troubles.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Sandy
[2] https://cleantechnica.com/2012/07/07/double-sided-solar-cell...
[3] https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/29/us/puerto-rico-growing-death-...
This is great. Deidre Connolly has been doing a pretty fantastic job of popularizing elliptic curve isogeny crypto, and her talk at Cloudflare is an excellent (detailed) intro to post-quantum key exchange:

https://twitter.com/durumcrustulum/status/839279075315314692
PayPal can do much worse than freeze. In fact, even if you have a zero balance they can simply decide to put you negative $5,000 as they did to me last year. I'll never forget not being able to communicate with a human while they pushed me via automated email through their 90's looking (and functioning) complaint system. It took me almost three restless weeks to have them restore my zero balance. If any of you honestly believe USDC would be any different by all means please stock up.
To stay below 2 degrees of warming via CO2 curtailment alone, serious curtailment would have had to start a generation ago. I wish that we had acted with urgency then, but we didn't. Now we need curtailment and active interventions.
Do carbon offset projects like Terrapass have any merit? I know it's not as good as selling my car and decking my life to planting trees, but is there any benefit at all?
Sure we could curtail CO2 emissions, but that means lowering people's quality of life which is a hard sell.
The problem is not what the transfers are denominated in, you could have LamboCoin if you wanted. It's acting as an unlicensed money transmitter at all that will get you.

Denominating in gold or lambos or USD doesn't get you around KYC/AML laws. Decentralized ERC20 tokens designed to transmit money are inherently illegal, and setting one up will get you a visit from the SEC if you can be traced back to it in any way. There is no end-run around this, this behavior is literally the exact thing KYC/AML laws are designed to prevent.

(This coin gets around it because it is not decentralized - only the company can mine blocks on this chain, and they can block transactions at will and validate IDs/etc when transacting back to USD. This allows them to enforce KYC/AML. They are aiming to be a licensed money transmitter.)
Crime is a Family Affair
Nationally defined contribution is a nice way of saying global carbon tax [1]. I mean sure the UN doesn't have a way to enforce the tax, but it's still a tax. Presumably this tax would wind up somewhere and someone, not the person who contributed it would spend it. This money spent would go to someone based on somebody's decision. Perhaps this company would be the recipient? There is so much pussyfooting around the whole issue of what the paris agreement was about due to politics. It's freaking underwear gnomes from South Park levels of hiding what's actually going on.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_Agreement#Nationally_det...
Yeah, this specific year has been quite underwhelming.

The s8, iphone x, etc where great jumps ahead (or at least they seemed to be, due to the different form factor and all). It is understandable that the year after that feels underwhelming, but it's weird that they chose this specific moment to increase prices.

Perhaps there's a big jump coming in the following years and they're trying to make the price increase for those features more palatable through gradual increases?
Coincidentally, I only just read this entertaining anecdote earlier today because I have to support a VBA application and thought I′d check out https://stackoverflow.com/tags/vba/info for good resources to get up to speed on it (coming from a Unix background). This was the last link on that page and knowing Joel’s a great writer, I read it first. I particularly liked this summation:

> He didn’t meddle in software if he trusted the people who were working on it, but you couldn’t bullshit him for a minute because he was a programmer. A real, actual, programmer.
Another scenario: say you have this $1500 review and it uncovers issues. You want the house anyway and try to negotiate the price down. Oops, the house goes to the next bidder who didn't bother with such a review. Basically, all you can do with the review is to "know what you're getting into".
Nope you are not the only one.
Yes, I was unclear, sorry. What I mean is: "There might physically be an amount of CO2 that can be released without compromising our ecosystem. That amount is fixed. We can't borrow on it and repay it later."