skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
He did demonstrate signing a message with Satoshi's private key. Except it was an elaborate trick involving an old signature lifted from a Bitcoin block mined in 2009[1].

[1] https://www.ccn.com/technical-proof-craig-wright-not-satoshi...
NDAs need to be heavily restricted, but it's a difficult distinction to draw between "trade secrets of the job" (which arguably should be protected) and "abusive working conditions" (which should not)
Siggraph 2019 Ray Tracing Roundup
I would assume it's when someone decided that KPI for news is clicks for headlines.
Building Conversational Interfaces to Make the Web More Accessible for All
> Nobody’s prepared to see a little girl have her organs taken out while she’s still alive and screaming.

On the one hand, of course you don't want to see this and of course you want it removed from your social media feed.

On the other hand, if it's hidden, it horrifies fewer people, and instead of rising social pressure to take action against it, it can fester in the dark.

So if we manage to replace a significant chunk of centralized, moderated social media with decentralized, unmoderated alternatives, many of us will be exposed to more of this kind of evil. But as a result more of us will be aware of it and motivated to fight it.

I'd rather participate in unmoderated media, even at a greater risk of being assaulted by this kind of crap. But at this extreme I can sympathize with those that want straight up censorship, even if sunlight is a better long term disinfectant.
How is India’s system broken?
Welcome to the wacky-zany world of vaccines misinformation.

Note - I don't claim anti-vaxxers don't have mistakes and misinformation - but it's coming for a different place. Anti-vaxxers are motivated by trying to save people from harm. Pro-vaxxers are motivated by trying to save people from harm and around $2000 per child (that complies with the vaccination schedule x3.5M children born in US each year.) The vaccine manufacturers make the money but there is "trickle-down-economics" where accomplices are duly rewarded (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-merck-gerberding/former-c...).
We're talking about two categories of people. The software developers would have no problem with stuff like this. Go ahead and create a UX toolkit called Fluttershy.

But if you mess with someone's actual products that make them money you'd probably hear from their legal team.
I agree with x=10.0 etc, but not all languages have named arguments :-) This is but one way to simulate them. Note that Fowler was using what appears to be a Java factory.

Breaking up the large function into smaller functions is ultimately the goal, yes. In my experience, researchers without software engineering backgrounds are very against breaking up an algorithm this way. For the most part, they think that it makes it less readable, because now their algorithm isn't in a single block like it is in the textbook. (The other argument they often give is that they fear breaking it up will impact performance).

It's certainly possible to use structured programming here and instead encapsulate the state into a little struct that is passed around; this was the way things were done in C before C++ came along and created classes, and there will always be people who think this to be the superior approach :-)

A set of isolated functions can get hairy if you're not able to hide the helpers away from the entry points; not all functions are necessarily generic and reusable elsewhere (if you end up with it that way for your specific application, great!). Encapsulation into a class or namespace can help with that.

I'm not sure I agree that isolated functions protects us against code rot more so than with classes. There is always refactoring to consider in both cases. In one camp, you have immutable data classes with functions operating on those data classes and possibly returning another data class (functional programming). In another camp, you encapsulate a reasonable amount of behavior into a class whose methods may mutate the class data (OOP). Both have their strengths.
If only there were a way to cryptographically prove ownership of some of the early Bitcoins...

I'm not quite convinced that going to the courts with libel suits really follows the cypherpunk ethos.
You're conflating the complexity of the language itself with the complexity of code written in that language. Brainfuck is a famously simple language; brainfuck codebases are quite complex. Sometimes building complex functionality into a language might be worthwhile, if it allows you to simplify code written in that language. But since a developer working in the language has to be able to understand both the language and the codebase they're working on, you need to be careful about that tradeoff, only adding to the language those features that are general and powerful enough to simplify a lot of codebases. Otherwise you blow the whole complexity budget on language functionality, leaving the developer with no spare mental capacity to understand the specific codebase - even if their codebase makes no or minimal use of some of those complex language features.

Better, where possible, to implement general-purpose reusable functionality in libraries written in ordinary code in the language. That's a win-win approach: reusable library code can simplify codebases written in the language, but since it's plain old code that follows the normal rules of the language, a library doesn't add language complexity that the developer is forced to keep in mind.

Fundamentally, the key to making codebases in your language understandable is to be compositional: make sure that the developer can easily understand the combination of a and b if they understand a and b separately. Library functions do that, because you can understand how code that calls a library function behaves without needing to understand what the library function does. But language features like throw/catch don't do that: you need to understand what throw does if you are to understand code that calls a function that throws, even if the code you're trying to use doesn't throw itself.
I built several of these from scratch after realizing that pegboard is already set up in the right pattern and dowel pins fit into peg holes perfectly.

I demo'd it at a STEM fair and everybody has a great time. It makes a ton of noise and a great visual demo. I even ended up learning a bunch about hopper theory because I had to 3d print a hopper to feed it and it kept jamming.
I try and do this but end up usually just working through tutorials each day rather than making something. I suppose its a balance. I've been thinking of making little tutorial videos of me making little dinky web apps, I probably just need to put the tutorials on hold and start making.
Maybe censoring is not effective?

Why not to embrace any content and just make police raids when someone uploads questionable content?

Is censorship solves anything?
This is not another app. This is Facebook saying that they want to create a widespread currency, not just a payment system. And I don't need to use it to become affected by the monetary policy of the behemoth that Libra could become.
Already filters fuck up way too much and restrict perfectly legal content.

Would users actually have a problem with that though? People have the freedom to share whatever they want, but that freedom doesn't necessarily have to include sharing it on Facebook. Facebook could decide to tell their users "We're filtering out the bad stuff much more aggressively now and unfortunately that might block your content by mistake." I think a lot of users would be fine with that.
To be honest, I’m not entirely sure either. But I’m generally put off by trashy types, and some hotels have a ton more of them. Thinking about it a bit more, I’m starting to think it might be more cultural though.
> That magical way exists already, and it's called gender.

If it was magical we wouldn't be having this conversation. What of individuals like Caster Semenya? Should we ban her from all sports because she does not fit classical gender classification? One thing is clear in my mind is that we should not force hormones on her as if she was cattle.
I think No Man's Sky went the wrong way when they started to promise whatever fans were begging them to promise...

If they had stuck with their seemly original plan, that was make a modern copy of the game Noctis, with no base building and a stronger focus on exploration of precedural worlds... things would have went better.

As soon they tried to mix it with minecraft they introduced incompatible elements on the game and ruined it, they made stuff they already had not work, and promised stuff that in the new game they were making made no sense.

I didn't played the current heavily patched version, but read about it, seemly the game shifted genre completely and is nothing like the original intention.

Meanwhile I wait for someone to make a cool noctis clone... or maybe have the original author finish Noctis 5.
Excellent! Thank you very much for sharing, this is exactly what I was looking for.
The good ol' event sourcing trick :D
There are a lot of competing theories of how the universe will end, but pretty much all mainstream cosmology admits that it will end. Very few cosmological models say otherwise.

However, even then I contend that eternity is just another kind of ending. Given an infinite time, everything that can happen will, and therefore it will also repeat. That means that every decision we make will be made again infinitely, every path followed an infinite number of times, always eventually returning back around again, and ultimately the outcome will still be the same.

So you see, under cosmologies of eternity, we just exist in a stasis of infinity and our decisions will not change that. Under cosmologies where the universe ends our decisions will not change that either. Does this mean that nothing we do matters?
As someone else mentioned, the BLUE is what we are usually looking for the Gauss-Markov theorem linked tells us why it is least squares.

EDIT: I am a bit suspicious though, since the definition of variance implicitly uses least squares. Maybe someone else can explain this better, but my expectation is that variance and the reason why it also uses squares (and not something else) should follow from some set of first principles.
that's 123 days from July 31 not 4 months from July 31
I wouldn't call Bloomberg reputable. They were the outlet that published the unfounded Chinese chip infiltration story.
1890?
Show HN: How to write, deploy and interact with an ethereum smart contract.
A lot of this depends on the type of coding you are doing and the needed test coverage. For example, testing a browser app that does CRUD for say a lead generation tool isn't as critical as an embedded application running a medical device.

That said, you mentioned mainly browser. One way to estimate the cost of testing (regardless of domain) is to consider what your code coverage needs to be, figure out for your language and tooling how many lines of code that is in comparison to the code it is testing, then calculate a cost based upon how long it takes to create said tests. It won't be perfect, and I'd not highlight the line of code methodology necessarily to management but it is an effective way to understand the problem. e.g. if I wrote a 2000 line module of moderate complexity and I had to write 3000 lines of test code to get to 100% coverage then my testing will likely be nearly an equal or slightly higher cost then the development, again a lot depending on tooling where code generation might help reduce the workload.

For example, I work on medical devices and associated products (including browser based). The general rule of thumb we are finding is that the cost for testing devices is roughly 1.5x the cost of the initial code creation. Said another way, if it took us 1 month to write the initial functionality, we expect it will take us 2.5 months to write the initial functionality with proper test coverage and test it all. Move to the web, node/javascript in our case, and the tooling is pretty slick and will create a lot of the boiler plate for you, so the testing there is more like a .6-.8 to 1 ratio. Meaning for every month worth of feature creation I generally estimate it will take 2.5-3 weeks of test code, so we would book 1.75 months for development & test creation for the same 1 month of features.

Mind you, this can all vary greatly depending on the team, requirements and needs. But should at least help you figure it out. For me when asked for a quick "guess", I always ballpark testing as 100% the cost of feature development for most projects. As an example, I recently was involved in rewriting some API's for our solution, we have spent as much time writing tests and testing as we did creating the initial features.

You will almost always hear pushback from people that don't understand that testing costs real time and money, but a key to it is if the testing is setup and done during feature development the cost is incremental to schedule and provides robust regression analysis and as you add features it gets more robust and takes less time to deploy a feature because testing will help validate the quality of the code.
Too bad this piece doesn't link to the article containing hard evidence of numerous frauds:

https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/op-ed-how-many-wrongs-m...

Imagine how easy it would be to prove his claim of being Satoshi: a signed message using the private key from the genesis block or any of the first few dozen blocks.

After all, he did say he would provide cryptographic proof. Instead what he produced was technobabble designed to mislead the ill-informed.

So instead, this performance artist goes around suing people for pointing out the obvious truth.

For the technically minded, here's one summary of one of Wright's signature frauds:

https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/81115/if-someone...
> what else should they be doing realistically?

- Pay them better

- Give them proper healthcare

- Don't isolate/silo them

These things would enable them to better deal with the inevitable stress and secondary PTSD that comes with their work. And would help FB perms to observe difficulties and quickly affect change.
Also, projects which can successfully hit milestones & have a wide audience, to use for performance reviews/promotion
Your argument being ... that they should simply get a new job if it's so bad, or that the article must be misrepresenting the job if they don't?
I think the point was more "it should be legal until some one exploits it" not that every business model should be legal.
Top JavaScript Hack for Optimized Performance
> As I understood it the large ones like No Man’s Sky or Anthem even doctored gameplay footage during their presentations

You're talking about vertical slices created years in advance of any realistic release date, for the sake of demonstrating to players a game that largely doesn't exist yet. Of course they're doctored. If they could show off natural gameplay, they'd have a near-releasable game and there'd be no need for the vertical slice.

> However when it was just "We might do this", then almost nobody blames them, a small minority might be angry or upset, but most don't care and many steps in to defend the devs in those cases.

When you start trying to make assertions about how "most players" responded, it becomes difficult to sort fact from fiction. "Most players" don't follow the games enthusiast press cycle -- whatever the perceived reaction to the press cycle for a game is, it's largely determined by the people who are the most engaged and the most vocal about the game in question, and it may be gauged differently depending on what slice of the reaction you were exposed to. That makes it pretty difficult to reach agreement as to what the temperament of the overall reaction was.

I also take a bit of issue with the expectation that designers should couch unconfirmed ideas with words like "might". It seems like an attempt to determine the validity of a wave of hysteria via a process of nitty-gritty word-lawyering that I don't think is very practical. Designers aren't always the best or most cautious of public speakers, so an idea that's in the "maybe" or "I hope" pile might not receive proper couching in suitable disclaimers when the designer speaks about it publicly. Further, players often don't remember the full context of words that are spoken about a game, and even are likely to want to read the most enticing thing possible out of the words written or spoken about a game they're intentionally following. Insisting that words that are publically spoken about a game in production are lawyerable like this just encourages studios to clamp down and stop speaking to the public about their craft, and leaves us with sterile messaging that's been carefully crafted by PR experts.

With that said, I'd counter that there's a pretty lengthy history of players misinterpreting the exploratory words of designers about possibilities for their in-production games as promises about what the final product would contain, and then later raking them over the coals for breaking those promises. On the spot I think that's going to be a tricky view to corroborate without going through a messy and time-consuming process of picking apart a bunch of case studies, though.
Talk to any non programmer or mathematician on the street (aka your users) and they’ll expect the answer to be Nov 30.
The article implies strongly that Facebook prefers to focus on the short term task of blocking offensive content and only pays lip service to the long term task of pursuing criminal charges.

I'd definitely believe that that is the case, as there's little economic incentive to play the long term game with its uncertain payout if you can just churn through low-wage content moderators instead.

Users of Facebook, but more realistically, employees of Facebook are the ones best situated to pressure Facebook to change that behavior.
KOST Stack: An Open Source Cloud Native Hybrid Database Stack
Having the time and money to sue people.
“But had his managers asked, they would have learned that Speagle had a history of anxiety and depression“

Should employers really be asking about mental health history during the hiring process?
That's never going to fly in the EU, the regular will simply insist that they keep all such data entirely separate, even if that's very impractical for them to do.
Where are the Unicorns that are showing explosive growth by creating huge numbers of jobs? All the ones I can find are either reducing jobs or just switching them to lower pay / less reliable “gigs”.

More generally, claims that just as many jobs are being created need evidence. I can easily provide evidence of jobs being eliminated, in the absence of evidence for job creation the conclusion is obvious.
It’s a shame that they go and ruin their steaks by blade tenderizing and noting on the package that this requires them to be cooked to 160F.
The point my first comment made is that you don't need to analyse a query at runtime, you just need to provide functions. I will agree again that Lisp makes REPLs easier to write than does C++, but a CL with Lua syntax could still, just as easily, provide functions and expose a REPL. It's the same solution, just without the unjustified AST transformations.
Amelio did a lot of the legwork on that deal.
Like we're talking about software developers here. I think it's funny that when a Google engineer does it there's some shadowy motivation to usurp a FOSS downloader library -- like they aren't like the rest of us picking silly names for things.

"Hey, curl is a super useful tool, it would be nice if it used our new fancy network protocol"

"Yeah, what should we name it?"

"Uhh -- wait, I got it. crurl and the library could be libcrurl"

"Hilarious! It's perfect!"
while libgurl would have been so fit
Haskell doesn't have special support for Either. It's a plain old data structure with a few type classes. You can write Either in any language that supports passing functions as parameter values.

It's taking the logical disjunction operator, `||` in many languages, and sticking it in a data structure. You can now pass it around like a normal JS value and combine it with other such values.

The benefit of this over exceptions is that for unexceptional situations you don't end up throwing away the context of your computation if something takes the "bad path." Instead of jumping to the exception handler and losing all of your data your program can handle the situation at the site of the error where it has the most context to solve the issue.

TFA wasn't advocating abandoning try/catch -- it was suggesting that for non-exceptional cases it will make your code cleaner.
I find it pretty boring that 41 percent of skiers that won medals between 2001–2010 had blood values that only has a probability of happening in 1 per 10000. It is basically theater where the audience is told to ignore that aspect.

Maybe in 100m the effect is smaller but I do not know who would win a marathon between a top 0.1% woman that has blood levels close or above doping levels vs a top 0.1% man who has average blood. As research say, the effect from blood doping is more noticeable in long distance endurance sports which a 100m dash is not.

We do have some understanding on what genetic factors give a performance benefit in sports. Weight, height, blood, hormones, and so on. Gender is just a fuzzy proxy. People who advocate for better classifiers is against a fuzzy proxy when current science can produce better competition where the result is less dictated from the start. I theory, such competition is more fair, healthy, and more interesting to watch.
If another country can use LinkedIn to identify targets... so can the local target's country. They can identify weak points, address them.

Also it occurs to me China's social credit system would do the same, both ways.

It might even make it easier to setup a double agent who is so tempting based on their profile the other country is sure to contact them and work with them.
> Why would they convert into a currency owned and controlled by a private company

Because if a bank runs the risk of failing (like BOTH of mine did in Holland) people freak out. Their bank accounts are suddenly a liability. If there is a fast and easy way to transfer money out of the banks, that would be a big plus. Even if you were to purchase dollars, they would still sit on your bank account.
I only read the title, not the article, and I had to scroll back to the top after reading your comment.
Got fooled as well.
He was an HNer, and explained he got into BTC early but he wasn't Satoshi, and didn't met Satoshi in person so he has no idea who Satoshi is.
A GIS alignment error delivered a lucrative tax break to a billionaire
Follow up: I got the 2019 i7.

Thanks for the feedback.
Googling for "libcrurl" currently gives you a "results for libcurl" as an autocorrect. If Google succeeds you'll get the opposite.

I'd say the name is definitely too close for comfort.
Yes, I think so. Intuitively, how I would like to think of this is that we are getting to this from the Euclidean distance metric. But skimming the proof seems like we use variance (which is defined using squares) as a presupposition.
Analysing Global CDN Performance
Somewhat offtopic but this reminded me of a tutorial from ages ago which showed how to add line numbers to notepad.exe . It was part of the things I followed while learning about cracking and reverse engineering.

I remember being super happy when I replicated the functionality, using wdasm32 and HIEW to patch my notepad code.
> But no, he's going the legal route for some strange reasons and it doesn't seem he's convincing the judge.

While most of the HN crowd, and fortunately also the judge, won’t be fooled I am sure that there are a lot of people in the world who don’t understand enough about cryptography, who are willing to buy the idea that this guy invented Bitcoin.
I mean don't think for a second that mcake couldn't be the name of a build utility that uses baking terms.

mcake knead && mcake bake