skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
or they expect the client to send a low res stream to the server, and they only do the "mixing" on the server side.
You can't have meaningful E2E encryption unless your private key is encrypted with a password that only you know. If the operator of the service has your un-encrypted private key then it is not clear in what way you have E2E encryption. And actually if you use a 4 digit pin it won't be of much use either.
Costly signalling theory is what I'd suggest to all the folks on this thread that struggle to wrap their heads around the wastefulness of it all...
At those timescales you'd think they would have ceased to exist due to atomic half-life or radiation or something.
Okay, that is indeed an advantage I forgot about.
No, not really. Extra PIN requirements make Signal unusable for lots of people. No proper chat backups makes Signal undesirable. That it mostly works the same might be true for you, but any minor difference is a problem for mom&pop.
Only a small percentage of the BBC is quality educational tv. Most of it is soaps, reality competition shows, and bad comedy(Mrs brown boys).

Advocates vastly over estimate how much educational content they put out. It's very small compared to the mindless entertainment part.

If you only paid for the education side of the BBC, you licence fee would probably be around 20 GBP annually.
I seem to read it says the kids are marginal because the decision to intervene or not depends on the investigator, not on the kid, parents or any determination of abuse. They also point out that there is enormous variance in investigators so they say this covers almost all kids in care. That's what they say "marginal" means.

Also: if the success rates for these kids are so low, then why intervene at all? Surely not doing anything is better than what this paper describes in terms of outcome. Or I should say: that's exactly what this paper says: no intervention is definitely the better option for the kid. And given that these kids end up in prison, it is the better option for both the victims of the crime that lands them in prison and for society that has to pay for it. So why intervene at all?
Here in Norway as of today we have distributed 65 k doses and administered 48 k firstly to the elderly who are in care homes, then to the over 75s in ad-hoc vaccination centres. That's 0.91% of the population vaccinated so far (first dose). There aren't many more doses available so distributing them to pharmacies would not accelerate the process very much if at all. The rate at which the vaccines are being administered is getting faster all the time. Once the vaccine starts arriving in the country in greater quantities they will start distributing them to local doctors.

As for making an appointment; here in Norway people will be notified by the local authority when they can get it. Doses are being dealt out in age groups, oldest first plus those especially at risk.
The Windows Signal client is way better than WhatsApp ridiculous thing where you have to be around the computer with your phone.
It is a popular theory that that's how life on earth started; the google term is panspermia iirc.
You're right except a few years ago the law was amended to include the licence requirement for watching anything on BBC iPlayer whether live or not. Other streaming services remain free.
Yes this is an interesting contrast. But besides public/private, it's also about delivering some concrete physical thing, vs. some virtual service. At least for the tracing part, I mean... a massive call-center roll-out just seems obviously prone to going badly wrong, a bit like huge IT projects. Especially given how uncertain the total demand for it was.

Whereas for vaccination the goal is clearer & easier to track. Which is not to say that you can't mess it up, of course, witness almost every other country.
> Proof of work is inherently wasteful.

But it's a necessary evil for a _distributed_ currency. It's a way to protect payment validation from being controlled by a single operator by making a "hostile take over" very expensive. IMHO criticizing Bitcoin for its "proof of work" algorithm only converys a serious lack of understanding of how crypto currencies actually work.

There is an alternative, namely, the "proof of stake" scheme that Ethereum is going to switch over to but it has other short comings that might or might not outweigh the benefits of energy savings.

> - The ever expanding blockchain is wasteful (in storage, computation, network).

Well, the blockchain's current size is 323.54 GB. That's quite a lot but can be stored easily on a $100 SSD. Using $100 worth of storage to maintain an asset market of roughly 600 billion dollars is useful trade off, I would say. Of course, I know the blockchain is being replicated all over the planet but Google's cloud storage probably dwarves its storage requirements.

> - The throughput is way too slow.

Yes, 10 minutes is not very fast. However, compare that to inter bank transactions and this number seems blazingly fast again. However, in my opionion Bitcoin is emerging as an alternative to gold that's primarily used for storing value over long times. It's primary purpose will not be to maintain payment networks. This role will be taken by Ethereum or other alternatives like Stella Lumens, Loopring or Polkadot.
Apple pretty much bought Ireland's tax authorities.

But, as people keep forgetting, Europe has giant multinationals and lobbyists of its own. I wouldn't presume to know who's on top politically in Sweden, but I imagine Saab (for example) have some influence.
> So I'm wondering if I'm too wimpy or if the author is irresponsible?

Both may be true, but pushing though because it feels ok in the morning ala the author is crazy
From the title, I initially thought that the author was a Google employee, and explained how to leave Google (is it that difficult?) :D
A cryptonerd once asked me ironically "what actually backs the US dollar?" My response was "11 aircraft carriers that will park off the coast of any country that refuses to recognize it."

"Fiat" at this point is just a loaded term used to try and dismiss all the things that actually make money worth something. Regulation, governance, monetary policy, and enforcement.

The second someone finds a repeatable double spend attack in bitcoin, the whole market cap crashes to zero and everyone will be screaming "why isn't anyone stopping this???"
Htop is not cli, and ncurses is in general just poor emulation of gui.
Doesn’t deserve to be down voted. If the estimates of the energy Bitcoin uses are accurate, then now we have a moral imperative to not use Bitcoin. That could be a really important consideration.
cool, we've just made something more complicated than netlify or whatever.

Looks like a great tool for migrating an existing dynamic site into a more static workflow, but it's not exactly the workflow I was replying to.
On a side note, I’m starting to suspect that Bitcoin, and Satoshi Nakamoto, is an internal NSA job.

And Satoshi must be the alias name for some cryptography expert, or experts, inside the NSA itself.

Hah, and even if you rearrange the words, its acronym is NSA. Like, Nakamoto SAtoshi. I just noticed that.

And maybe the architect behind it, used a Japanese origin name, to throw people off their trail. To pin it to some foreign country, instead of the United States government.

After all, who else can keep a big secret like this? And laugh all the way to the bank. While trolling the entire world, at the same time.

Some ideas:

1. The Satoshi Nakamoto guy on the message boards, wrote in perfect colloquial American English. Even his sense of humor was American. His grammar was perfect, and similar to a Millennial/Gen-X aged American. Like, he grew up chatting on AIM and ICQ back in the 90s and 00s. And probably on BBS message boards back in the 80s and 90s.

2. Satoshi mined the originating Bitcoins, and they are incredibly valuable now, and worth around $8.8 billion dollars in mid 2020. Who wouldn’t cash out on it, and realize all the gains, or even some of the gains? How about some super secret organization, that specializes in cryptography. And especially an organization that doesn’t immediately need the money.

3. Bitcoin mining is consuming a ton of electricity. Increasing carbon pollution, and depleting natural resources. There is only one other country that is generating so much electricity, that a large percentage of it, goes straight into Bitcoin mining. You can guess for yourself which country this is.

I don’t think this was intentional, but maybe a side effect is that it will bankrupt other competitor countries that the USA does not like.

4. Maybe another strategic end goal is to trick others to put their money into Bitcoin, and wait until it becomes very very valuable. Like, 100 or 1000 or 1 million times more valuable than it is today, it’s a very long and patient wait, then the US Federal government will pass a law declaring the Bitcoins to be illegal tender. And will then pass another law to forcefully seize all private Bitcoin assets, like the way cops take candy from a baby, with their Civil Asset Forfeiture policy.

Who knows. All this is just fun conjecture. Maybe there really is a Satoshi Nakamoto out there. But, I’d probably believe Santa Claus is real, before I believe that cover story.
I know a more than one that have been struggling with it so apparently yes.
> Electricity is free

That's hard to believe. Can I just go there (as an EU citizen) and mine bitcoins for free?
Datalegreya Font
Wireless charging doesn't solve anything - you would still need to deliver 100kWh(for a large car battery) into the charging pad within a minute. And then you need to receive it on the other end - you don't have a plug, but obviously your receiver now has the same issue. You just moved where the problem is. I'd argue that having such an incredibly strong inductive field is a problem as well, but yeah, you're not even going to get that far.

Parallel charging is potentially the answer - but even with 10 cables, for a 100kWh battery, you're still talking.....600kW per cable? CCS goes only up to 200kW(and those are THICK cables), so if you increase the charging speed to 3 minutes then yes, you could do it with 10 cables. 6 minutes with 5 cables, 30 minutes with one cable.....and we're(almost) back to what existing technology already allows?
I'm not sure using CNN and Fox News as examples of how the system should work is a great counterpoint. The US has a massive problem with terrible quality TV and web news sources. The licence fee system at least attempts to create an alternative to that.
>It's a tech prototype that enabled large-scale gambling.

Worse than that. But there is a dimension hinted at in the article that makes this not a good asset either. That is, the fact that a dozen or two large syndicates have deployed specific specialized hardware located in Iceland, Iran, Venezuela, and China etc., is not a reasonable guaranty of the future security of compute and network power in the system. Simply having computer power now linked in a global Internet does not bestow real world power. The U.S., E.U., have strong currencies backed by real world strength. Bitcoin on the other hand is a commercial ledger for drug, fraud, gambling, extortion, and money laundering transactions. It's the modern day Barbary Pirates, or take your pick of any other geographically-centralized pirate community. As pirates learn, when they achieve a sufficient notariety, entity-decentralization ceases to be a true protection.

It's been 10 years, Bitcoin still is as useless as it was in 2010, but it steadily is gaining notoriety.
I agree, Google is bad enough on its own, no need to compare. It gets less negative press compared to Facebook, probably because they managed their public relations better, but if you really look, you will find plenty of reasons not to share all your data with them.

(Having said that, Facebook is of course just as bad as Google if not worse)
Same for me. Re-reading some of the books as an adult made me appreciate them more though.

The one exception was The Chosen. That book was just awesome.
Encrypted private key isn't the purpose of signal's PIN. Signal's private key is actually used, discarded and possibly recreated quite nonchalantly by the application on your phone. The only purpose of the PIN is securing data that is stored on Signal's servers.
It is a revolutionary black hole for gamblers but also for normal people, enabled by intentional behavior of the global financial institutions.

The rug will be pulled from under Bitcoion, and when it happens, the disruption will be revolutionary as well. Until then ride the tiger with caution.
And how did life start on the asteroid? :D
It can only do 19,200 bit/s, give it a second!
Both can coexist, but you can do it in a more capitalism or more socialist way.

Take e.g. healthcare. You can have all private healthcare (capitalist), a public and private sector coexisting (mixed), or exclusively public provider (socialist).

And that's just a sector. You can have socialist healthcare but capitalist manufacturing. Every economy is mixed, but it can balance to one side or the other.

(btw, all modern economies tend to be capitalist, but social democracies in Europe are definitely less capitalist than the US)
Accidentally submitted the french version, fixed link:

http://www.datalegreya.com/?lang=en

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25832196
The author of this article is a professor of statistics at Columbia, so I’m not sure I’d call him a “talker” or “TED person”. The article even starts by mentioning a conference talk about his research, so I doubt the problem is that he doesn’t have a lot to say.
The perpetual problem here is that while BBC is required to "be boring" in many respects, if it loses too many viewers its value is questioned. So they have an ongoing struggle that they're told off if they focus too much on doing things that is or becomes popular with commercial broadcasters, while at the same time they face threats of cuts in funding if they don't bring in the viewers.
In Germany, the government has no direct control about the TV fees. There is a complex mechanism for deciding about increases, which involves independent entities. Especially, the government can't just cut the fees to influence the media.
> probably because they managed their public relations better

It's not only PR. Google haven't violated their users' privacy to the extent Facebook have, it's not even close.
I've read many stupid posts about de-googling for various reasons. Mostly by people who also want me to follow them on social media platforms, whose data collection obviously doesn't matter, because...

But this one really amazes me:

> Recently Google changed their policy for storing photos. Starting from July 2021 you won't have unlimited High Quality storage as before rather than 15GB limit. This is still okay in terms of space but the politics behind it is just disgusting. Google was effectively feeding it's photo AI algorithms for face detection and tagging for years now using user data obtained by giving up the service for free. Now when these algorithms got so good and it's almost impossible to make them better and Google don't need users anymore they switched to make some money from the service.

This guy is salty that Google doesn't provide their platform for free. Aside from that, of course, some ramblings about privacy and stuff. But seriously, complaining for not getting something for free. The entitlement is strong here. I'd go as far and use the author's words here and say it's disgusting. And the privacy arguments are BS, just look at those pretty Google Fonts he uses to tell you how bad Google is.
From what I remember when I read it, the book (intentionally?) felt kind of 'jazzy'. No matter how hard I try, I can't really like jazz beyond the 'smooth jazz' muzak I might occasionally have on in the background.

A friend of mine studied jazz and is a great musician, and so I've come to appreciate it a bit more, but only conceptually. I still can't listen to it, for some reason.
The most promising Italian startups to watch out for in 2021
yum comes from Yellow Dog Linux, circa 1999. apt comes from Debian, around 1997. The Redhat solution follows the Debian solution by about 2-3 years.

Ubuntu didn't even exist until 2004. So please, cut down on the hyperbole.
I agree that you do not need to read books, but books are a good proxy for demanding content. If I count articles, the short texts from some gossip portal are valued as much as Harvard Business Review, science journal or whatever else, but their value is wildly different. Same goes for books by the way, but effort to finish a book is much higher.

I also do not believe reading time stats, as people are not that good on self reporting, especially without hard criteria.

The problem is that if you do not read demanding content, your ability to comprehend gets smaller. We made a society that you can live in without much intellectual struggle, but the question is whether we can keep having that society if we permanently cease to pursue intellectual interests.
IPv4 is vastly superior to IPv6. The latter being far too complicated and over designed to have any justification for adoption other than IPv4 scarcity. 20 years later and your average non-engineer "power user" can barely get it working without a ton of handholding.
I visited Seoul in 2003 and stayed in some random hotel. In that hotel was one channel clearly run by the American military.

I was horrified to see it had public service announcement type announcements to tell US Military personal that selling Korean women into sex slavery is illegal!!!

The fact that they actually had to send that message.... WTF!!!
oops :))
Agile is lightweight?
stepcraft has cheap kits (https://shop.stepcraft-systems.com/stepcraft-2-300-construct...) and also offers them preassembled for a reasonable price.
Show HN: Topic based learning of programming concepts or language spec
The relevant metric is the ratio of doses the government has on hand vs the the number administered.

Here in WA state, only one third of the doses delivered have been administered.

Heck, Amazon is headquartered here. If I was the governor, I'd have gotten Jeff Bezos on the horn 6 weeks ago with "halp!" I bet Amazon would love to help out, they'd make some money and it'd be great PR.
Yes.

Coding is not like assembling the machine. Coding is like inventing the machine.
The point of having a fee vs. a tax is, that the government has no direct control of it. So they can't just adjust it at will. The fee is set for several years in advance and increased from time to time to adjust for inflation etc. But it is an independant entitiy deciding about this.
In order to increase the fee for public braodcasters, not a tax (small bt crucial difference), both chambers of parliament have to agree. The bundestag is directly elected, the bundesrat represents the indivdual states. This means, in order to change the fee, every state and the bundestag have to agree. For the states, that means one single state not voting for a fee change prevent any fee change. Just happened, one state government feared backlash from the AfD and the right wing from the CDU (Merkels party) and voted against an increase.

So in order to change the fee, it is not just one govnment that can do something, but a grand total of 17 (federal plus 16 states). Usually they all agreed, but with different ruling coalitions in each state, this mix of left and right having to agree in itself prevents the public bradcasters from becoming a tool for government propaganda. They do represent the establishment, so. Populists hate this.

EDIT: To be really accurate, the legislative branch sets the fees, not the executive on. The legislative consists of two houses, Bundestag and Bundesrat. The Bundesrat is controlled by the state governments, which are composed of local arms of the parties present in the Bundestag (kind of like congress) and regional parties, mostly those state and federal governments are coalitions of multiple parties. It is the party line thing where it gets blurred between executive and legislative bodies.

EDIT: I fell for a common misconception, as an other user pointed out. It s not the Bundestag and Bundesrat deciding these fees, but rather a compact of the 16 states. The same states make up the Bundesrat, the compact is not the same body, so. Which further decreases the influence the federal executive, and even legaslative, branches have o public broadcasting.
I do not know about their attempts at minimizing meta-data however I guess the usual meta-data like who texted whom and when is still there. Maybe it is not stored, but I have to take their word for it (and I tend to believe them), but the data is still there.

This data is there at any rate however confederated chat apps can use different servers (so data is not congregated) and you can also change accounts easily (it's harder to change phone number).
BBC's In Our Time (pretty good podcast) also did an episode on The Great Gatsby: https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000r4tq
For the article:

> In September 1945, United States Armed Forces, led by General John R. Hodge, occupied South Korea after Korea's liberation from Japan. This also included Imperial Japanese comfort stations.[39] These events continued the government-sanctioned prostitution that was established in Korea under Japan's rule.

Sounds like they just took over what the Japanese had put in place... which is interesting to me because a) I never had heard of it b) living in Japan, the comfort women is a recurring theme of tension with SK, but I've never heard about SK giving crap to the US about this.
Samsung heir Lee Jae Yong sentenced to prison for bribery and embezzlement
> His buy-out of her shares was a poorly communicated effort to remove the business from between them and to attempt to salvage their familial bond. Hildegard instead saw it as a financial assault on herself and resorted to communicating with her own son through lawyers, even after the transaction was completed.

Of course the action did not worked to salvage communication between them? How can one possibly expect better communication after hostile buyout and firing? Whatever her flaws as mother, the subsequent communication only through layers after that seems to me as not just expected, but even reasonable.

I mean, him doing that might have been rational business decision if she was doing job badly, I dont want to judge that. But expecting the relationships to improve after that sounds completely absurd.
I’m guessing the client sends multiple resolutions and bitrates. The server selectively forwards the stream most appropriate at the time.

It would be incredibly cost prohibitive to run servers with live transcoding at their scale with a widely used free tier.
I once got lost in the wetlands behind the Mountain View campus whilst trying to find an off-road bike route to Stanford and just ended up back where I started, but muddier. This is a probably a metaphor for something.
How to leave Google as a developer, the easy way:

1. Any time Google deprecates a service/library you're using or breaks it with backwards-incompatible changes, move to a non-Google equivalent.

2. Don't adopt any new Google services/libraries.

And viola, before you know it you'll be Google free.
Well, seamless... on iOS they just lean on iCloud and dump/backup everything with no way of historicizing. It’s easy only until you’ve hit the iCloud free tier limit
I agree the pin is bad UX, but it isn't mandatory, it can be turned off in settings.
You're looking at the solution. Not validating the problem.

Think about the problem horses/cars were solving. It's clear people 'wanted' that problem being solved just by how prevalent horse-as-utility were.
I’d argue that research is to try to pass knowledge learned to someone else ( which is why professors teach and do the majority of research ). The first thing that goes when a deadline is coming up is... documentation... so I’d argue no, even a cobol program in a bank who no one knows about but is 100% stable has value.
Someone get them a bottle of Retro-Brite.