skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The Visa kWh figure includes all that. The office workers and whatnot. The source is Visa corporate responsibility data. https://usa.visa.com/dam/VCOM/download/corporate-responsibil... that's for 2019.

They include air travel and whatnot. Basically the whole energy consumption of the company. Also including building stuff etc.

Visa doesn't share that in order to poke at Bitcoin. They share that because enviromentalism is hip nowadays. So they want to tell how they're improving their CO2 emissions as a company.
Time to add another thing to Drake equation: Fb - the fraction of civilizations who didn’t fall prey for proof of work consensus. Others are invisible, cause they are very advanced, but all they do is mining crypto for food. To eat a sandwich you have to prove that it’s yours and a consensus is that it costs few MWh. Small islands of non-crypto trust appear millenia by millenia, but they are slowly marked as communism and disbanded by military consensus. It would be much faster, if military smart contract balance legacy didn’t require a petawatt-hour to sign one resolution with all conditionals, involving century-long testing of its code. Thankfully these groups do not form too often, because when you’re born, there is already a set of smart contracts that your ggggg-parent signed for your kin to obey. Maybe your ggg-children will have a chance with other families, if they manage to meet in the same aeon.
Haven't there been free iphone dev courses from stanford for free for over a decade? I recall iTunesU hosting them, and perhaps Coursera/EdX, and their own website etc.

Which is great, of course, but is this different?
All public transit initiatives from Elon Musk seem to show that he's entertaining a vision where everyone keeps their own car, with their own Tesla tunnels to get home. I find this idea that people would be willing to share a car with the whole world pretty naive, majority of car owners are likely to want to keep their cars for themselves.
TSLA has more cash than they can efficiently spend at this time. Putting it in diversified liquid asset classes hedges against the fed printing trillions of dollars of the next 3-5 years and destroying 50% of the value of that cash.
> But if I create something without expecting it to be successful why shouldn't that be protected on the off chance it does end up being successful?

Copyright is not meant to protect your profits. It's meant to encourage creative risk taking. If you're going to take the creative risk anyway, then copyright isn't necessary.
Yep, it is understandable.

What is interesting to me, that USA users write about new cars that they expect 150K+ miles from them and it was not so in the past. Completely opposite to what users think here.
Hi HN, today I want to show you my latest project. As you surely know, Clubhouse is extremely popular. But on Twitter, the Clubhouse events are rather plain. The sharing image contains only the CH logo. No further information about the actual event is included. Clublink improves these by promoting your event in the sharing image already.

Jens Polomski (https://twitter.com/Jens_Polo) and myself have been building this little helper since mid January. The process is the same as with a traditional url shortener. Here, the focus is to render a better preview for social networks. This way you see directly who is involved in a clubhouse event. I’ve noticed a few HN members using Clubhouse as well and thought it might be useful, if you are planning any new events soon.
Really?

https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-56012952

"Bitcoin uses more electricity annually than the whole of Argentina, analysis by Cambridge University suggests. "

Using more electricity than most nations worldwide to run a database seems wasteful to me. Extravagantly wasteful. "Doors and windows open with the A/C cranked" wasteful.
Centralized plants emit less carbon per joule of useable energy, but mechanical-electrical-mechanical conversions end up making the process overall less efficient. The real win is decoupling energy consumption from energy production.
Okay, so the gist of that article is that bitcoin burns about a third as much energy as the entire global institution of banking, based on some extremely back-of-the-envelope calculations.

Bitcoin's current market cap is about $600 billion. There are quadrillions of dollars worth of capital in the the world, mostly managed by banks. Bitcoin remains EXTREMELY inefficient in comparison.
You have to expend resources to make progress. The alternative to Bitcoin is a bloody worldwide revolution. Most people aren't actually happy living in a world of extreme inequality where only the 0.01% have any say in how our society is run.

Getting off state backed currency is a prerequisite to social progress. Bitcoin is doing this in a bloodless, warless manner.
I find your distinction between law abiding citizens and criminals hilarious.

There is no difference between the two and to pretend like there is a difference is how we get the same people chanting both "we need to punish criminals more severely!" and "It's shameful the US has so much of it's population in prison"

edit: But also, how do you expect a COP to be able to differentiate between the 2 in the field? They are essentially the ones that gets to decide who is a criminal or not which brings us back to how the police are given the ability to abuse their power.
Offsets can very easily be the wrong answer (though the author is quite correct that it depends on what you're trying to do). If your user intends to use one of the timezones that has a daylight savings calculation, the offset changes as the year goes on. Offsets can also change if the definition of the timezone itself changes (Russia ceased to use daylight savings in 2014).

Offsets can be useful if one is attempting to record a historical incident, where the timezone had a particular-defined offset at the point in time the incident occurred (though for my money, I'd just convert that time to UTC on storage).
Yes, high powered gaming isn't eco friendly either, but can we please stop ignoring magnitude and utility in this thread?

You can power a typical US household for almost an entire month using the energy of a single bitcoin transaction. What utility does Bitcoin bring with that single transaction? Is it worth the measurable harm it's doing to our ecosystem and human lives?
> GenX is not a bit less problematic

Do you mean Generation X, or is this a reference to some chemical?
I would assume that that budget is mostly for central organisation expenses rather than paying for development. Things like legal fees, paying for CI infrastructure etc. The development work would continue to be done by people being paid by various companies (or in their free time).
Maybe SpaceX will soon launch bitcoin mining satellites which will make bitcoin clean
Deluxe Paint does defeat Graphicraft handily. DPaint III is my go to.

I collect, but still find it pretty easy to get replacements for when one of my CRTs...

https://www.bytecellar.com/photo_pano.html

...dies. I recently replaced the Amiga 2000's 1084S with a more versatile Sony PVM (which lets me do PAL s-video from my Atari 800XL). Right now there are nearly 10 Commodore RGB screens on eBay, btw...
Still in the uncanny valley, but it feels like we're climbing out of it slowly.
Thank you! We're here to help. Please pick a time in our calendar https://base64.ai/meeting
I don't know what you mean by "pretend we didn't". We don't pretend anything - we change the clocks and observe that change.
People who say that we are moving away from individually owned to centralized ownership on-demand vehicle usage obviously don’t have families.
By computing more hashes, you raise the difficulty for everyone else mining so you do ultimately push out the less efficient miners.
But they did block GME buying anyway.
The US military is absolutely required to maintain the value of the USD. If not for the threat of violence, any nation state in the world could print as much USD as they cared.

This cost must be taken into account.
The point is that he physically cannot read the papers they give him unless they have absolutely enormous middle school graphs
What you are talking about is a typical Malthusian understanding of reality. At some level, there are physical limits that cannot be exceeded. On a practical level, those limits are vastly beyond what we can currently comprehend or use, and the entirety of human history is a testament to doing more and more with less and less. (With blockchain technology being a notable exception of always doing the same amount of stuff with more and more resources)

Also, as a small aside... the concept of an externality is not about pollution or waste. It is about a cost that is imposed on people other than the individual responsible for the cost. The finitude of the planet is immaterial to the existence of externalities.
Even worse, the Bitcoin hashrate goes up as energy costs come down. The amount of energy burned is an equilibrium. But you can’t compare the costs of banking or the costs of dollar bill production to the cost of Bitcoin transactions for one fundamental reason: Bitcoin transactions are irreversible, traditional transactions are not. Bitcoin is the only way to mark information in a decentralized ledger without a trusted 3rd party and we don’t know if there’s a way to get the same functionality with less energy use, since the energy use provides the security by making it extremely hard to fake a transaction.
I think Tesla buying Bitcoin is simply reflecting the fact that Bitcoin is looking more and more entrenched - sort of it's here-to-stay realization. Gold probably had similar transition from being a shiny fad to a more entrenched store of value at some point in its history.

Personally, my problem with Bitcoin has been that some of the early adopters cornered large portions of it early on and that governments would never accept that reality. However, cat seems to be out of the bag. It seems to be playing out more like gold rush - whoever cornered, great. At some point governments will catch up and start hoarding it. And then it becomes regularized.

As for no intrinsic value, the high difficulty of mining and high difficulty of faking it, appears to make it a pretty reliable store of value.
@ecommerceguy, for protecting my wealth against dilution by endless money printing, stimulus and bailouts of broken companies/banks.

I strongly believe that the current financial system is completely broken, so I'd like to opt out of it as much as possible.
Fair, but how many small businesses who are unable or unwilling to set up a payment terminal will be able to maintain the infrastructure needed to participate in a distributed consensus network?

There will still be an intermediary to whom the small business will pay fees for a turnkey solution. And absolutely those fees would be lower in a world where anyone can participate and compete on them. But that's definitely not the world we live in just yet, and even if/when it arrives, I don't think anyone at the retail level (either the consumer or the storefront) will have an appreciably different experience from what they have today.

EDIT: Just adding also, clearing times is the other huge barrier. Obviously no retail environment can tolerate a transaction delay of more than a few seconds, so the other function of the intermediary would be to manage that reality, by some combination of pre-clearing transactions for customers who look safe (classical CC fraud detection where de-anonymizing would be a key component), or maybe a pre-paying scheme (which ends up sounding a lot like a bank debit card).
But if all copyrights required registration, then all the notices would have to go along with that registration. You'd have to commit identity theft, which is a separate crime that you would be prosecuted for.
It is an issue, you have to compare it to other forms of payment, and it's several magnitudes worse than any alternative.

> A single bitcoin transaction alone consumes 621 KWh, or half a million times more energy consumption than a credit card payment.

Read for instance this: https://twitter.com/smdiehl/status/1350869944888664064
> Even if you wanted to, it's hard to optimize when somewhere down the stack someone might call sys._getframe() and start poking at the variables twenty frames up. That's not quite a language design problem.

It's hard to optimize only if you accept the tenet that it sys._getframe(), and all its uses, must continue to work exactly the same in optimized code.

Instead, you can just declare that that it (and any related sort of anti-pattern of the same ilk) won't work in optimized code. If you want the speed from optimized compiling of some code, then do not do to those things in that particular code.

The programmer can also be given fine-grained tools over optimization, so as to be able to choose how much is done where, on at least a function-by-function basis, if not statement or expression.

It's not written in stone that compiled code must behave exactly as interpreted code in every last regard, or that optimized code must behave as unoptimized code, in every regard. They behave the same in those ways which are selected as requirements and documented, and that's it.

In C in a GNU environment, I suspect your Glibc backtrace() function won't work very well if the code is compiled with -fomit-frame-pointer.

In the abstract semantics of C++, there are situations where the existence of temporary objects is implied. These objects are of a programmer-defined class type and can have constructors and destructors with side-effects. Yet, C++ allows compete freedom in optimizing away temporary objects.

The compiler could help by diagnosing situations, as much as possible, when it's not able to preserve this kind of semantics. Like if a sys._getframe call is being compiled with optimizations that rule it out, a warning could be issued that it won't work, and the generated code for it could blow up at run-time, if stepped on.

One way in which compiled code in a dynamic language could differ from interpreted code (or less "vigorously" compiled code) is safety. For that, you want some fine-grained, explicit switch, which expresses "in this block of code it's okay to make certain unsafe assumptions about values and types". Then, he optimizer removes checks from the generated code, or chooses unsafe primitives from the VM instruction set.

The code will then behave differently under conditions where the assumptions are violated. The unoptimized code will gracefully detect the problems, whereas the vigorously compiled code will behave erratically.

This entire view can nicely take into account programmer skill levels. Advanced optimization simply isn't foisted onto programmers of all skill levels, so then they have to grapple with issues they don't understand, with impaired ability to debug. You make it opt-in. People debug their programs to maturity without it and then gradually introduce it in places that are identified as bottlenecks.
I think that is the fundamental disagreement. Many people do not view bitcoin as doing anything useful. If it is useful, how does it compare to other solutions for the same problems.
Yes, but the number of transactions in 'bitcoin' as it's currently defined is severely limited (blocks are already full at a $15 per transaction cost). Conceptually, making something which increases the transaction count involves forking bitcoin, and a fork which aimed to do exactly that was denounced heavily by the community and rejected by the markets. The marginal cost may be small but the cost per transaction is high, by design, and by design which has extremely heavy resistance to even small and simple changes.
Resilience Engineering – Don’t Be Afraid to Show Your Vulnerable Side
Haha. It's cool that you think that.
this thread is about bitcoins. So I thought its implied we are talking about bitcoin. Maintaining a POW block chain is inherently wasteful, but yes POS blockchains can maybe save this.
Presumably you've never heard of the Idiot Savant?
What do you mean by "objective value"? My belief is that such a thing doesn't exist.
CorelDRAW Graphics Suite X7 2021 v22.2.0.532 Crack
Hi, author here!

I just released my course on React hooks at useEffect.dev.

The content was initially available as an eBook, but after thinking about it, I think a course is a way better support for it.

I looked for a platform to publish interactive non-video courses but couldn’t find any suitable to my needs, so as any developer would do, I developed my own solution!

I enjoyed creating it a lot! It uses:

- Next.js: it was time I finally try it for a real project; I love it!
- MDX to write the course content (so I can customize how each element is rendered)
- React-live to offer interactive code examples and exercises in the course (no need to leave the web browser!)
- Magic.link for authentication (never used it before, very cool for no password auth)
- Stripe to handle purchases
- Vercel to deploy everything

The resulting source code is quite clean, and it shouldn’t be too hard to make it reusable to create other courses, so I’ll try to do that soon.

I hope you’ll like it! If you have any questions I’d be glad to answer them :)
India is considering four-day work weeks but with longer shifts
Aren't most cars unused for 90% of the day because that is when everyone is working? In that case won't we still have to have around the same number of cars to take people to and from work?
The link between Bitcoin and carbon emissions is absolutely crystal clear. The USD and American hegemony has a massive tangle of indirect dependencies through governments and bureaucracies, spy agencies, militaries, etc, none of which you can disavow yourself from.

Yet you can divest from Bitcoin by simply not buying it.

It's the absolute perfect expression of our greed as a species. Ruining the planet for ephemeral bits. Bitcoin might as well be rebranded the "anti carbon offset". You're literally doing nothing but buying into a speculation market that is backed by only bits, and those bits are obtained at the cost of a supremely inefficient cryptographic process which has attracted massive electricity investment simply to make money. It has zero indirect benefit to society.
From Apple: "you’ll need to receive the user’s permission through the AppTrackingTransparency framework to track them or access their device’s advertising identifier".

OR access IDFA being the key there. If you can't honestly and easily answer the question "does this 3rd party SDK track my users?" then you probably should not be using it.
NXP I.mx 6 / I.mx 8M Plus Based ARM Low-Power Computer
> This thread was just about the two alternatives (the PEP and explicit capture), not about the PEP in general, or about defending the PEP or even saying that the better alternative is "good". We just say it's better than the PEP. Not sure how you read that into what we wrote.

Bullshit. You said, and I quote, "There are 100s of things in Python who would be confusing". That's what I was responding to. And my point stands: just because there are other pain points in Python doesn't mean we should accept more pain points into it.

> Then go make that argument in some thread in this post discussing the PEP proposal in general?

I’d prefer to make that argument in the thread where I was already talking you about the PEP proposal in general. ;)
And that doesn't even take into account the devastating environmental and humanitarian impact of war (which the US government is in a constant state of). The true cost of state backed dollars far exceeds that of Bitcoin.
While this is undoubtedly cool, it's not infinite zoom. Try zooming in off the path and you are pulled back.

Or at least I interpreted zooming as the ability to direct it.
This is so obviously what needs to happen, it's really surprising it's not a feature in all major languages by now. I bet in 10 years time, giving dependencies complete control would seem crazy.

Here is an interesting proposal on how to possibly get there in JS with import maps: https://guybedford.com/secure-modular-runtimes

Deno uses ambient permissions for the entire process and unfortunately missed the opportunity to do it right.
I remember reading that Chromium's engine is slower sometimes because it follows the standard more strictly. https://codeberg.org/teddit/teddit/issues/24#issuecomment-16...
Sorry you find it confusing. Our vision is to provide AI services for everything in base64 format; images, videos, sounds, etc.
We do this. I had to work on a greenfield project and it used a ton of libs that weren’t in our repo. It was so annoying to have a list of repos to add to the in-house list, then discover things didn’t work, so now we need these. It literally added weeks of man-hours to the project, per day.
Anyone know of something like this that runs on openwrt?
I guess half a percent of the world's electricity consumption isn't that much in the grand scheme of things, but if Bitcoin's price goes up 10X then so will its energy usage. Mining effort is proportional to the value of the block reward.

https://cbeci.org/cbeci/comparisons
@s1artibartfast, then it comes down to, who decides what's considered useful? In many ways, the market does, right? If it was useless trash, it wouldn't have any value, but that's clearly not the case.
But the number of transactions in a block is fixed.

We went through this with BTC/BCH. The BTC folks did not want to increase block size.
This is perhaps the dumbest thing I’ve read on the Internet… this week.
I said the same thing when Quibi started their ad blitz months and months before launching. Quibi had the problem that their business model was completely unproven (who TF actually has the stones to not just identify, but try to create a market between Netflix and YouTube?) This has a similar problem; they are launching just as the pandemic is starting to ratchet down, meaning their whole raison d'etre is in question.

But hey, sweet sweet VC money.
Ah, the “everything is subjective” rabbit hole. No thanks, that’s never a useful conversation.

The purpose of any monetary system is to facilitate the exchange of goods and services. That’s why humans make money; to avoid the need to barter or depend on social credit systems that don’t scale well. This provides us some objective goals with which we can compare and contrast monetary systems against; while what one does with money is subjective, we can objectively compare the efficiency and ease with which a monetary system can facilitate transactions. In this area Bitcoin does terribly. This is probably why Bitcoin advocates have mostly moved onto “it’s a store of value”, that’s more a more defensible proposition.
Rust is implemented in Rust (https://github.com/rust-lang/rust)
> TLS 1.3's zero round trip resumption by its nature can't be bullet proof against repetition

The server side can easily keep track of which nonces have been used, and not allow any re-used nonces to have any side effects.

This can be implemented in something like spanner by keeping a database of valid nonces, and tying the marking a nonce as used to the other effects of the HTTP request in the same transaction. Spanners global-consistency will ensure only one transaction will commit. In most cases, the data can be sent back to the user without waiting for commit, preventing any cross-ocean latency penalty too.

It's a shame that I don't see a single HTTP/3 server which has any support for a scheme like this.
They know the Apple Watch works.

They haven’t tested any other devices.

This is about the Apple Watch.

Your comment is supposition. Likely correct, but not guaranteed.
I know people who made nearly this much as new grads (not including stock). https://www.levels.fyi/
NASA's Climate Communications Might Not Recover
This also reminds me of the post Jon Skeet wrote about using UTC: https://codeblog.jonskeet.uk/2019/03/27/storing-utc-is-not-a...

Also discussed on HN back in the days: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19500640
Old news? These excellent videos have been posted on Stanford’s YouTube channel for 8 months: https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLpGHT1n4-mAtTj9oywMWoBx0d...