skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
What I find interesting about the performance of this type of hardware is how it affects the software we are using for storage.
The article talked about how the Linux kernel just can't keep up, but what about databases or kv stores. Are the trade-offs those types of solutions make still valid for this type of hardware?

RocksDB, and LSM algorithms in general, seem to be designed with the assumption that random block I/O is slow. It appears that, for modern hardware, that assumption no longer holds, and the software only slows things down [0].

[0] - https://github.com/BLepers/KVell/blob/master/sosp19-final40....
That optimization makes the 3D games more complex, not less. What Factorio does is impressive and surely comes with its own challenges, but it isn't necessarily more complex.
That is exactly the problem
all are banking, some offer trading/investments. i was replying to a monzo question, a banking startup.

for trading/investments it really depends on your situation and location.

(for example: some countries offer 0% taxes on capital gains for trading if done using special products, but not all available platforms will have them...)
I should (finally) receive my RTX 3090 card today (PCIe 4.0 too!), I guess here goes my weekend (and the following weekends over a couple of years)!
.... that is the whole point of a thread.
With the amount of media attention WSB has been gaining, this is setting itself up for "Wall Street versus The People" situation. It may be politically tough to go against the retailers now, particularly mid-pandemic and with all the other political comorbidities US is suffering from.
So you’re saying the issue is “what if the grocery goes insolvent before it can hand you the milk, but after you’ve paid”?

I’m still not understanding how robinhood lost money in the first place.
TrustWalletApp Sucks You in to Buy Dogecoin, but Then You Can’t
> With that out of the way, I would recommend using a test double in exactly one kind of situation: When it's genuinely awkward to use the real thing.

THANK YOU.

I'm actually pretty staunchly anti-mocking (and anything similar). I think too many developers start thinking of testing as the goal rather than as the means. What this means to me is I don't care if it's technically an integration test vs a unit test, I care that it tests _REALITY_.

There are times when the isolation given by mocking can be useful, but I submit it's useful far far less often than many claim. And your examples are a good use as well.

But imo trying to mock everything is mostly mental masturbation only with long-term maintenance costs.
dupe: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25955510
Thanks, but I'm still left wondering: why would dtc be unable to settle those trades? It seems like it would be easier for dtc to settle RobinHood trades if they were all (worst case) in one symbol than it is when clients trade 101 different names...
Ah, censorship is cool except when it happens to you! I know all about that. Sorry for the schadenfreude, but it’s just too hard to fight it.
This is pretty much it rather than coordinated tech action. I support WSB and am not even remotely a Trumper but what happened to Parler was a much better example of a Big Tech shut down.
The last giant crash was triggered by a single party (Bear Stearns) running out of credit. Do not underestimate the events that could follow if this volatility destabilizes a large market participant.
Show HN: Logit: CLI tool to handle JSON logs
You might be able to buy a smaller server but the rack density doesnt necessarily change. You still have to worry about cooling and power so lots of DCs would have 1/4 or 1/2 racks.
Also “management” and “devops” needs to trust every dev to push out a high quality update. Twice daily deploys don’t happen if QA goes through a 48 hour test process for every release.
Why do doctors want "curated, evidence - based answers" to their questions? Why does a health system want this for their doctors?
There is a technical definition for a "zombie", which is apparently a term of art. As his own link points out, a "zombie" is defined as a company that can cover its operating costs and debt service, but not debt principal. Those companies include many that nobody believes are "functionally dead" or "phony-baloney". I keep making fun of him for linking to an article about zombies that counts Moderna --- Moderna, for Christ's sake --- among their numbers, but nobody thinks that Exxon is about to go under, either.

I'm not really here to debate the definition. It's his link that enumerates the companies I'm pointing out. Which is why I'm making the case that he hasn't really read the stories he's linking to.

We could go further into the analysis: a whole bunch of companies, like Delta, which Taibbi implies will never be worth anything again, are distressed because of the pandemic, which will clear up this year. Demand for the products of these kinds of companies will return and the list of "zombie companies" will change, as it has in the past (per Bloomberg, take Sprint as an example). But this is really dignifying Taibbi's polemic, isn't it?
> if you wanted performance you'd probably be better off starting from scratch with an emulator design that cared about performance and which was really clear about its use-cases

See box86:

https://github.com/ptitSeb/box86
>Could be? It's an open, publicly-documented market manipulation event.

Strange question, what's the bar for market manipulation? For example if a company took out debt to buy their own stock in order to drive up the price would that count?
If that's the case I'm kinda confused why trading platforms keep banning trades in these particular meme stocks?
Apparently when retail investors win it's "Manipulative trading activity"... I'm so glad Bitcoin and DeFi was invented in my lifetime and I can be protected by maths and computer science instead of a three letter agency.
Are you referring to the recent censoring of platforms that refused to moderate the inciting of violence? I believe there is a huge difference. You can not have a society that is tolerant to intolerance, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance
> The "backend" of the market seems way more coupled than I imagined it is.

Exactly. Overlay this on the backdrop of a frothy, juiced up market and a bunch of angry people on their phones (I bought a few GME out of spite at $360 after considering it way back at $15)... one little push could cause the market to throw a rod, I feel. These people run the system at max RPM with minimal oil as it is.
There's a place for both I think. We've seen a lot of lo-fi successes as of late, but inevitably some of the reliably biggest selling games are the annual big budget updated graphics FPS and sports titles. I don't know if FIFA 2K22 would have as much draw if they sold it as a sprite-based title.
What is the measure of novelty? This seems like a useless thing to attempt to measure, and then to claim one group "beats" another in it.

I could use an RNG to slam together a bunch of rules and I can pretty much guarantee novelty. There, I did it. I "beat" a professional designer. Is the game worth playing?
Homemade Homemade Porn – Homemade Sex Videos – Homemade XXX Movies
If you want a game from a designer that isn't safe, check out https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/295905/cosmic-frog
I know of cases from the Danish market where the financial service authorities went for people who had tried driving the price up in a pump and dump scheme for a small penny stock. Using internet forums and a couple of trading accounts.

They made a few thousand dollars and got months in jail for it.

The problem with wsb is that it has gotten so big and there are too many involved at this point.
I can't find any documentation that a short squeeze is illegal. Can you?
A SEC investigation will take time. I wouldn't judge much based on their general initial statement.
There is no "probably." It is well-known that people leave their civil servant jobs at regulatory industries, after putting in their time, and bring their know-how and connections to big banks and hedge funds in return for cushy salaries.
In other news there are reports of men in $4,000 suits with shovels and pick axes working above New York's many fiber optic lines.
There's definitely going to be some impact on other stocks, as at the very least, retail trading apps overcompensate and block buys on other stocks (including Freetrade for all the US stocks right now). Hard to quantify the magnitude of the impact, though.
Oh I forgot, we're all automatons with no sense of humor.

BLEEP BLOOP. BAD ROBOT WILL PUNISH SELF.
It's GameStop... They already have garbage revenue. They don't have a business. They're failing. Hence the short. Issuing shares while the stock price is high is not only an everyday business move but it's also the correct thing for them to do here. AMC has already done it.
I would guess its probably all of the above.
Sure. I wasn't really thinking of density, just the interesting start of the "death" of 4 socket servers. Being an old-timer, it's interesting to me because "typical database server" has been synonymous with 4P/4U for a long, long time.
"The list must grow, the spice must flow"
The gameplay is complex, but that does not mean the software must be complex. Take for example the ancient game of Go. It's a bunch of very simple rules with some stones, yet it's a highly complex game that could not be beaten with traditional software-solutions.
Their codebase is also covered by unit tests [0] and integration tests [1].

[0]: https://factorio.com/blog/post/fff-60

[1]: https://youtu.be/LXnyTZBmfXM
The institutions can game all the way up though. The mistake the retail guys made in this instance was not accounting for the other institutional vultures Who had no prior interest in it, but would opportunistically pile in.

It’s becoming clear that a better designed attack was necessary. Unless government steps in, this attack will enrich market makers and a lot of hedge funds, while cleaning out retails who may not have fully understood the dynamics of this attack.

In my view though, that’s the market. It’s a learning process. Retailers will gain more understanding and the next attack will be better designed.
I don't have a horse in the race re: GME but this spooked me - transfer initiated to another brokerage
Roblox postponed to go public because of SEC scrutiny of revenue recognition
There's a bit of nuance. We're using the word "manipulation" to mean two different things -- one is the colloquial meaning, and yes it's very obvious that the price was manipulated in that sense. As far as the legal definition of manipulation is concerned though, we haven't necessarily met all the requirements.
> Capitalism is simply an economic system where the means of production are privately owned. Growth is not a requirement or even feature of capitalism.

The problem is that private ownership leads to the classic collective action problem, where actions that are individually rational to each private owner have consequences that are collectively irrational and make the world worse off.

This is not to say that private ownership should be abolished. But there has to at least be a heavy collective counterweight to self-interested wealth accumulation.
Well... they will start by redefining "market manipulation" to encompass all activity they now consider disruptive (also suitably redefined). This is America today.
You are mostly correct, but there is one exception. When you own a stock your broker keeps them for you, and can loan them out (for money - this is why brokers don't charge to hold your stocks for you). There are various ways to buy stocks and then get them transformed into a form where they cannot be shorted. If enough people do this the brokers will be forced to get those shorted shares back, which means they can buy your shares back on the market and leave you with the bill.

The above has happened, but it is rare. Not letting your broker deal with holding the stock for you is a big hassle.
This is my question.

And it comes down to liability as well. Basing your treatment decisions on UpToDate or NCCS guidelines or Cochrane Reviews is pretty defensible. But basing it on the findings of an AI start up? How is that being addressed?

But don’t get me wrong. I think there is a lot of value in physicians having easy access to pharmacists to discuss treatment options. Right now that doesn’t happen that easily.
I consider this to be the funniest part.

It's a cat and mouse game. This is a once in a lifetime event where you can push everything to extreme limits. As wall street gets more desperate they will resort to extreme and more extreme tactics. The average retail investor is not going for a win. They are trying to make the house expose all of the cheap tricks.

The end result is a checklist of publicly confirmed anti retail strategies.

Short selling above and beyond? Check

Bailouts among wallstreet? Check

Deplatforming? Check

Control conventional media? Check

Prevent buying stocks? Check

Forcibly sell shares? The jury is still out
Here's more info on their GFX pipeline, where Blender is used to create the 3D models then pre-rendered for the game: https://www.factorio.com/blog/post/fff-146 (2016)
>I thought fundamentals mattered. Turns out they don't right now.

Fundamentals never matter "right now". Fundamentals are about long-term investing and growing money over time.

Day trading is about speculation, not investing. WallstreetBETS has nothing to do with market fundamentals or investing money. This is the point of the Keynes quote "The Markets Can Remain Irrational Longer Than You Can Remain Solvent" - Markets don't rely on the the "fundamentals" in the short term, only in the long term.

>Everyone talking about what GME is 'actually worth' is spouting bullshit.

That's because in the long term, GME's value hasn't changed. GameStop the company is just as valuable as it was a month, meaning it's basically worthless. Which means before too long the stock is going to crash and the majority of people who bought it are going to lose a lot of money, while the few who bought earlier will make out.

Whether it's the legal definition of "pump and dump" is pretty irrelevant, because in practice it's a pump and dump scheme, and is going to leave the majority of people involved with a lot of regrets.
Increased demand relative to increased supply drives price upwards. If the supply curve shifts more than the demand curve, the price goes lower.

For a retail business that earns single digit profit margins with no moat, no employed talent, and no real assets, I can only assume once the supply curve starts moving, it will move fast as everyone tries to exit.
Wow they are super expensive.

They will be poaching the bikes themselves if ever one gets there.
It's a private company. They can do that if they want.
How fast are your components really changing though? I write a lot of documentation for the systems I work on and rarely find old diagrams not making sense at all. Maybe smaller projects might have more changes going on but I find I have to add things more often than completely scrapping docs (the specific product I work on is almost 10 years old although the company I work for is a lot older)
If the company were to issue a statement that they believed their actions would raise the share price, then yes.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/78i
It boils down where and who did the manipulation?

140% shorts, including naked shorts from Melvin?

RH stopping buys but allowing sells?

Conclusive proof that Citidel put their finger on the scales to force RH's actions?

WSB's members constantly chanting hold/diamond hands/ride to the moon?

There's a lot at play, and further examination will make for a good post mortem...
Some of the examples in the article seem like a completely acceptable reason for a ban. There's never truth nor value in saying "<all members of (gender|race)> exhibit <extremely bad trait>". Saying that sort of thing does nothing but increase divisiveness.
Appropriate concepts, repackage them for the cargo cult of the day, profit.

The whole self-help industry in a nutshell.
It's in the SEC rules.

"Although some short squeezes may occur naturally in the market, a scheme to manipulate the price or availability of stock in order to cause a short squeeze is illegal."

From https://www.sec.gov/investor/pubs/regsho.htm.

It's an open question whether this case is more of a natural occurrence or "a scheme to manipulate", given that it's all randos who found a Schelling point and are now hyping each other up. I think it's fair to say it's unprecedented.
> Up until now a lot of it was justified by many many people as protecting protected classes

Some of it was justified that way. Steam's war on adult games wasn't. The use of lawsuits/libel laws to shut down critics isn't justified that way. FOSTA-SESTA wasn't (reasonably) justified that way. The "cancel-culture" debate has always been an extremely narrow part of the free speech debate, and has always been a little bit problematic because it attracts people who don't understand how freedom of association works and how to balance that with more general (but still valid) concerns about cultural censorship and othering. Most real free speech debate and advocacy happens outside of the framing of Conservatives vs Liberals.

People should be thinking about free speech more broadly, and they should be considering not just the censorship they see in service of protecting marginalized communities/classes, but also the less publicized censorship that directly affects those communities.

I'm trying to walk a line, because I don't want to discourage people from waking up, but do I do want people who are incensed about WSB to realize is that WSB is in an enormously privileged position right now, and compared to the history of many other communities, their censorship is mild and temporary.
Curious if anyone knows what technology is state of art for self service blood taking? (think prick tests where you have to squeeze blood form finger into a vial)
Matt Levine did a pretty good job explaining why it probably doesn't fit the traditional definition of market manipulation in his newsletter on Tuesday[1], see the second section titled "But is it securities fraud?"

[1]https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-01-26/will-w...
OpenFirmware used Forth for this.
Haven't played much factorio but I imagine that simulating the factory is more akin to a game of life, wireworld or a graph signal processing. I.e.: in one tick you process all inputs of each entity, and put them to outputs, maybe having a queue on each. This will always scale linearly, and you can also parallelise this quite comfortably.

In comparison collision detection and AI need to rely on a lot of trickery (and thus bugs) because naïve approaches explode in complexity.
> You can voice your disregard for the principles of freedom and liberty.

And when the principles of freedom and liberty come into conflict with each other, how will you resolve it? If you must excommunicate me from the church of freedom of speech for the heresy of believing in the existence of more important personal liberties, then I accept my ostracision.

In the meantime, /u/DeepFuckingValue was doxxed today. Do you believe that Reuters' right to free speech outweighs his right to privacy?
> now that they [=hedge funds]’re losing

Are they, though? Sure, some of them lost. But there are others that will only get stronger if some competitors are eliminated (a point also made by https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25957142). And even the ones that lost big so far can get back into the frenzy. Buying on the way up... or shorting near the top.

Here is my take on the "irony" of the situation: Hedge funds can make money off of stocks they believe to be overvalued. So the WSB activists handed them... a stock that everyone knows to be MASSIVELY overvalued. Yeah, that will show them.
It’s interesting in the lack of transparency Facebook provides over which groups or individuals are banned for which reasons.
I think the more practical consequence is to fine and place injunctions on the software providers. They have the most to lose for violating compliance.
This was largely a process that began by reading the manual to my ZX Spectrum home computer, along with lots and lots of trial, error, and experimentation.

Of course it has been 30 years since that happened, but learning BASIC, then later Z80 machine code, definitely put me on the path towards an IT career.
> It's an open, publicly-documented market manipulation event.

I understand that if someone publicly give you a financial strategy that is sound and it is not based on a ponzi then it is a recommendation.
There may be a huge selection bias in their study: insiders are more likely to publish their game, weather they are bad or good. In comparison, hobbyist have to propose better games in order to have the chance to be visible and then published. This would bias the study into thinking that hobbyist are more innovative than professionals.
I suspect the profit margin for a $50k gas guzzling truck is pretty high.
> Ristricting trading is a way of managing risk.

So when the low probability event actually happens, should I be happy to have had my trading privileges revoked and my risk managed for me?
That's because there are more hobbyists than professional designers.
In the networking world (DPDK) huge pages and static pinning everything is a huge deal as you have very few cpu cycles per network packet.
Ever think that they just like the stock?
> The Commission will closely review actions taken by regulated entities that may disadvantage investors or otherwise unduly inhibit their ability to trade certain securities. In addition, we will act to protect retail investors when the facts demonstrate abusive or manipulative trading activity that is prohibited by the federal securities laws.

Hopeful sentences for the ones who long GME. How often does the initial statement SEC makes actually matter?
The idea that Akin Olla thinks "censorship is cool" is unwarranted. Posts like this contribute nothing to the conversation.
I've just spend the last few months working on a medication potency scoring system using ASHP data. Would be interested to hear more about your approach.
The problem there is that (assuming a source of true noise) X_b is a random variable, in fact if b is sufficiently high its distribution approximates your target distribution pretty well. So if you're arguing "instead of burn-in you can also use an approximate sample of your target distribution" then that's technically correct.

However generating an approximate sample is the exact problem that a MCMC process is trying to solve.
> even if we isolate whatever mechanism they have (and can synthesize it readily), it's still an immune modulator, so all the same caveats for steroid creams might apply at any significant dose.

Sure, but it wouldn't be an infection you could spread to other people. It also wouldn't be an infection that could grow, of its own accord, to undesirable levels within you. That's a huge improvement.
Here's also a review of Avi Loeb's arguments written and presented by prof David Kipping from the Cool Worlds Lab:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qX_Bj7064Ms
I don't think it's fair here to assume that by "retail investors" the SEC means all retail investors. Retail is not one giant group.

It is possible for one group of retail (lets say the original WSBs crowd) to take illegal action that harms other retail investors.

Taking action to protect the mass of retail does not mean that all of retail is immediately in the clear.
Linux Terminal – The Ultimate Cheat Sheet