skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I am dead serious.

The FED did cause the great depression and a lot of it had to do with currency being tied too closely to a deflationary token (gold).

>You cannot eat gold or bitcoin.

That is precisely the problem. The economy can get into a bad equilibrium where hoarding intrinsically valueless tokens displaces investing in productive assets. This state can persist because the firsts to invest in productive things are at a disadvantage to the token hoarders (at least for some time).

>The “hoarders” at some point will want to consume be it a pizza or a lambo.

Yes, then it becomes a game of "catch the peak" because when people realize all these tokens are sitting on the sideline but production has declined and there isn't much to purchase with the tokens, and that if they want to buy something at a good price they better be quick, the cycle can reverse explosively.

It's important for aggregate savings to be (at least indirectly) tied to things you "can eat" or the production thereof.
Enlighten me then, I couldn't find anything by myself after weeding out the speculation/pump and dump/exit scam shills.

What real world problem is bitcoin solving right now and which isn't completely negligible next to the infrastructure cost of btc ?

PS: I'm not talking about the theoretical benefits the bitcoin aficionados are parroting all day long for the last 10 years and are still nowhere to be seen
Am I the only one that hates this incredibly overused title trope? Come up with something vaguely original.
Wouldn't the same apply to gold?
Biological Cells are collective thinkers
I didn't like Bitcoin when it came out and I still don't get it. I used it for a while for the only thing it seems possible useful for, but I don't have saving of it (to bad I guess).

- It uses to much energy.

- Its simply a public ledger with horrible privacy characteristics.

You can of course work around the privacy issue, but systems should be designed to have that characteristic, not require work around on every level.

And in terms of economics, actually running a complex, multiplayer economy on Bitcoin is in my opinion not possible at all.

This is something that Bitcoin advocates ignore, but even under the Gold standard, the actual broad money (in a monetarist sense) was expanding and contracting because of banks issuing currency and fractional reserve banking.

I had various arguments with people involved in Bitcoin claiming Side-Chains could have the same properties, but I don't see how that makes sense.

I for one, don't want to go back to what amounts to energy inefficient, horrible privacy gold coins.
I've already moved the whole office. Even have the one proprietary program that we need, Mathematica, running in Linux VMs on OpenBSD and displaying without a hitch thanks to x.org.
I'm pretty sure most gold investors don't actually have the gold physically at their location (Maybe someone can prove me wrong here).

Gold seems to be mainly to store loads of money, without actually having the physical drawbacks of gold. So most money invested in gold, is basically a paper that claims you have gold. In that case, the benefits of the physical attributes of gold go away pretty quickly.

So having a claim that you own gold, is maybe not that different than storing value in some virtual thing that everyone agrees on has some value.

Let's say you do want to have the physical gold at your location. Well, then you have to think about transport and safely storing it.

It feels like Bitcoin bootstrapped it's way up to having value. And right now, it seems as a "store of value", it has some benefits over gold itself.
About a year ago, I started migrating to a vanity domain, currently hosted at Google, for this reason. If I get locked out of Google, I lose my history, but at least I can move to another provider and avoid being locked out of my life for the indefinite future.
Maybe I shouldn't. I mean it will be a huge PR campaign, cover-ups of possible failures and big profits for participating parties. Still probably net positive.
If an accused person has the right to see the source code that produced evidence against them, is it a violation of their rights for the source code to be obfuscated, or even just so spaghettified that not even an expert can understand it?

I kinda think that should be a violation. But deciding whether a particular piece of code is so bad is so subjective that I'm not sure on how you'd make a legal standard out of it. Maybe start with "the linter found a ratio of warnings to lines > X%" or some such.

Having a legal standard of code coherence/incoherence might help filter pull requests. "This PR cannot be merged to this project because it is configured to reject legally incoherent code."

As code becomes more complex it may become more meaningful to have access to the test suite, and to challenge the evidence if the tests are inadequate to demonstrate the correct code behavior.
Can you switch mode once the executable's already been launched, though? It's already got its tty, so you'd presumably need to start up the ncurses-capable terminal on demand, switch it in, and play back any meaningful prior output so it's in sync. The page is dead so I can't see how they handle it, but each of those steps is potentially problematic, isn't it?
I don't want to rely on a currency which is managed and beholden to an unelected cartel of corporations.

I prefer representative government by elected officials.
> It wasn’t just Twitter that pointed out how misleading this framing was. So did Politifact. So did Vox. And The Washington Post did so rather scaldingly.

> And it’s not like any of those outlets are pro-Trump! And neither am I!

I can't remember where I first heard it, but there's a general sense that journalists view themselves as a 'priestly class' that perform a sacred role not only to report, but to shape the narrative.

The idea that author should have to state they don't support Donald Trump (which has no bearing on the facts) to counteract potential heresy charges for pointing out the NYT's mistakes seems to fit well with that.
For Ethereum, Defi.(Decentralized finance). Basically crypto based financial services run on smart contracts as Decentralized Autonomous Organizations (DAOs). Services include lending and borrowing, decentralized exchange, insurance, stablecoins, derivatives, portfolio management and more.

MakerDao, Uniswap, Compound Finance, Yearn Finance, just to name a few. It's only just starting to take off, see more metrics here https://defipulse.com/

Another area taking off on Ethereum right now are "Non Fungible Tokens". Basically digital art trading on crypto.
If you're looking for an actually anonymous cryptocurrency, see Monero.
I'd say the fastest way of making someone have a bad view of Bitcoin is to make them buy something with Bitcoin.

I've actually had to buy Bitcoin in order to pay for something that was about $20. Talk about a hassle and fees upon fees.
I would need a very very big pile of very clear cut evidence to find someone guilty of a crime where the likely outcome is a substantial prison time.

It's all tradeoffs, but "his blood was found on the murder weapon" wouldn't be sufficient for me - some childhood enemy could easily have planted a bunch of forensic evidence next to a crime scene.
or it is a hedge against a market downturn as gold is "not cool" to buy from Tesla and cash should be invested if not used.
> Javascript is ubiquitous, and you can't avoid it.

I can't avoid it if I want to do web frontend programming, agreed. So "what is the web frontend programming" in your analogy, i.e. the thing I can't do without Bitcoin?
I'll echo this sentiment - the age old 'get a new car, join a new forum' has been short circuited by FB. That part, I'll concede, is actually not that awful. Having all my old forums email me on my birthday reminds me what a pain it was to have a unique account of half a dozen forums.

The worst part, though, is that searching through the groups on FB is terrible. Like, atrocious. There is a lot of really good knowledge present, but due to the way FB displays it, finding information is a real chore.
Sounds rational since conviction should be on irrefutable evidence;
In most criminal complaints the defendant has far fewer resources than then the prosecution. The prosecution has a conflict of interest to get a conviction. Absolutely everything about their process needs to be above reproach, including their experts. A challenge to that process, approved by a judge, seems like a small consolation in a biased system.
[dead] usually means the user themselves deleted it, I think. I flag spam comments routinely and it definitely takes more than one user flag to get a comment to the [flagged] state where text is hidden.
Tesla buys $1.5B worth of Bitcoin
> It is of extreme importance that we colonise mars

Is it? Such a moonshot ( Marsshot if you will) requires enormous resources, resources which can be better spent to improve the planet we have, and stop the damage we're doing to it. I don't believe all of humanity can move to and sustain on Mars within a reasonable timeframe and budget ( 100 years, tens trillions of dollars). What exactly is the point of doing so? To run away from the mess on Earth? That's a very shit "solution" and a huge waste IMO.
I have no idea if it's regional or what. But when a Red Delicious is good, it's great. So many are that gross mealy mess and I don't think there's any way to tell from the outside.
You know what would be revolutionary? Getting rid of currency altogether.

So long as we still exist in a scarcity reality (not the utopian post-scarcity vision), there must a way to abstractly represent the value one possesses and may trade for goods/services.
Indeed, in Figma people who don't have a MacBook can also access the design.
Show HN: A PC Gamepad Adapter for Path of Exile I Built in Golang
Maybe they want to diversify and not have so much in cash (ie: USD) because they think it will get devalued over the coming years, especially compared to Bitcoin.
Because they likely use metrics which highlight how many criminals where caught due to their system.

On the other side a metric which says how many times no conclusive evidence was found with DNA testing sounds more like a metric of failure (but is not, if you don't have qualitative good enough evidence including "complete enough" DNA you should not make up results which simply don't exists, but then courts ruling without conclusive evidence isn't that rare and some would say even necessary to some degree. It's just that many believe DNA tests are somehow unfailable perfects ways to prove the presence of an specific person at a specific place, but they are often not).
Literally mining gold is also not very environmentally friendly and uses a lot of power, probably not as much as Bitcoin though.

And Bitcoin will always remain what it is now, a system for transferring bits in a decentralized fashion over the internet. Even if Bitcoin is worth $0, as long as there is a sender and a receiver (and at least one miner online), you'll be able to transact Bitcoin, this is hardly worthless.

> governments who see it as a threat , with India even going so far as to suggest they would ban it

This for me is a huge selling point for Bitcoin (et al). If famously shady governments like India and the US starts talking about banning something, I immediately start looking into why and how they are banning it. So far, the arguments seems to be that they are scared of loosing control, and if it gotten that far, it's because they genuinely believe cryptocurrencies could replace their centralized currencies. More reason to get involved in it.
I knew nothing of ZXing Barcode Scanner other than it was super simple and "just works." Nice to know that it's open source! I've been happily using on all my android phones since I started with the HTC Dream so many years ago.
>You know what would be revolutionary? Getting rid of currency altogether.

I agree. The future is not keeping track. If someone needs something they should have it. The only reason that hasn't happened is scarcity and logistics, which I believe we will solve in the not so distant future.
What is unfortunate is that it took going to appeal to force the judge to allow the code review at all.

Without, at minimum, an independent review (and preferably open source code) the software and lab processes being used constitute an inscrutable "black box" process within which any judgment can be made, for any conceivable reason, with life-changing effects for the defendant (and for the victims of a crime if, for example, a rapist or murderer is set free by a non-match decision).

One could even say that unreviewable code here falls under the umbrella of "secret evidence", which much of the world already knows can be easily misused and/or misapplied at the whim of the court.
The title is editorialized - which makes sense, since the original is only "CSI-MURDER" - but it completely mistates the content of the page.

CSI-MURDER is a way to prevent localizing people/objects with WiFi.
Accusing Tesla of not investing enough is pretty rich.
Reddit stooped the r/Wallstreet bets mods
But imagine if Linux used the BSD license and FreeBSD used the GPL license. Absent any other philosophical changes to how each project was managed, I don't think the incentives to upstream projects would be any different. Sony would dump a bunch of code on their website somewhere (which would be excellent, because others could study and use it as desired), and little else would change.

It's about project management, not licenses.
I didn't ask if you'd be grateful, I asked if you'd take the expanded unemployment insurance. I suspect a lot of people were grumbling all the way to the direct deposit form but filled it out anyway.

And it's not as if governments forced these shutdowns on a whim or because they felt like it. They were the result of scientific examination, and more importantly, the majority of voters were in favour of them (I think 8 out of 10 in the US in April?). In this case the government was just expressing the will of the people, whether it was your personal will or not.
Sure, but since we aren't, then using less energy is what we should be doing instead.
> Am I missing something?

Nope! That's a keen observation.

The 2 and 3 dimension stuff is still coming. That's when Tree Notation starts to get really interesting.

Here's one recent example of a 2-d thingy:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vn2aJA5ANUc

The beauty of this stuff as it gets going as all of these seemingly simple langs will be able to take advantage of the 2d and 3d stuff.

I always stretch myself thin, but I'm starting to see other people do really cool things with this concept of 2 and 3 dimensional languages, an area of research that has been really quiet for ~50 years. If anyone is interested I'm telling ya I still can't see the limit! :)_
Two would be amazing. One would be nice. Currently we get zero.
I've said it before but I love how these futuristic sail-powered cargo ship designers completely ignore a millenia of sailboat design history. But OK, I'm sure they know better - look at the pretty CG renders!
It's not compatible with Cloudflare Workers afaik.
Google uses non-human automation to make some decisions, including banning accounts. As others have mentioned, this is not unreasonable as long as there is a reasonable (in terms of time and effort) path to disputing a ban - i.e., speaking to a human about the issue.

But Google (and Facebook, and probably some other companies) don't have reasonable processes for disputing or resolving these situations.

Some have said that we should consider Google's challenge: lots of users/activities that need to be monitored and policed. The assumption is that Google could not afford to do this "reasonably" with humans instead of automated systems because the volume is high.

But Google certainly could hire and train humans to follow a process for reviewing and assisting in resolving these cases. They don't. It is doubtful that they cannot afford to do this; I haven't checked their annual report lately, but I'm guessing they still have a healthy profit.

In the unlikely event that involving more humans would be too expensive, then Google should raise their prices (or stop giving so much away for free).

To summarize, there is no excuse for Google to operate this way. They do because they can, and because the damage still falls into the "acceptable losses" column.
Bitcoin is not immune to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pump_and_dump
> gold hoarding caused the economy to collapse in 1929

You have a source for that?

> When people, businesses and banks start hording tokens instead of investing in building and maintaining the production capacity of consumables

Central banks are pumping money into the economy at an incredible rate. There's no shortage of credit or liquidity anywhere.
It sounds like you said what I said... Except that the discussion was specifically about federal law, there are various states that have additional laws.
>If it's a large company like Facebook that values these products like Whatsapp at billions I trust them at least on this issue. I'm pretty sure they're not going to put junk third party malware for 50k into the Whatsapp client.

Zuck: They "trust me"

Zuck: Dumb fucks.
The target speed is around 10 knots. Commercial cargo vessels are designed at 20-23 knots, some lower at 15-18 knots (slow steaming), rounding it at 20. So they need about a quarter of the power to maintain half the speed.
Beta test our app, win an iPhone 12 [video]
I use Wireguard regularly when I'm out to access my home LAN where I have some VM's running various things like pihole (DNS server to block ads), mail server, hobby dev server, etc.

Wireguard is very light (cf: OpenVPN) and easy to setup/use- highly recommend using it.
When you say speculative, for whom do you mean?

Do you mean that it would be easier for some rich person to make more money by speculating in dollars and euros than it would be to speculate in bitcoins?
What you describe is actually worse than the mafia. They would offer protection to some extent against third party rip-off.
I am surprised that Germany hasn't been taken to the European court of human rights over this abuse.

Maybe those German privacy activists going after google et all might want to look at this.
This method doesn't protect against evidence tampering. Someone can just take a drop of that blood and smear it on the victims clothes. Now it doesn't matter how many labs analyze it, it's always going to come back a match...
> Exactly how to structure it so it can't be gamed/subverted is tricky

Most companies pay a commission to the recruiter or a referral bonus. You could distribute that to those candidates who contribute to the recommendation of the winning candidate. You're incentivized to recommend the best person, because you can still make money even if you don't get the job.

Also you could always hire for a batch of positions, or at least more than one person at a time. That way, just because someone else gets the job doesn't preclude you from also getting it.
The issue is not having a default app or not, the issue is having a qr reader external service.

Imagine you are an app developer of a really simple app that takes a number and tells you if that number is in a valid phone format or not. You have a textbox, the user enters it, you do the checking and display the result. Easy. Now imagine you want to allow scanning a qr which contains a number, to do the checking afterwards. You need to either ask your users to use an external app to scan and then open yours, include all the qr related library inside yours, or use a special intent from a third party app (that the users need to have already installed).

First solution is slow and inconvenience for users, the second is what almost all apps do, but then the code logic is duplicated on all of them (with the increment in app size). The third option is the best, both for the developer and for the user, however there is no official qr service so in the end this is basically option 1.

I mean, you already have a service to get a picture, a file and a contact, among others (you don't need to include all the code, simply do a call to the respective intent and wait for the result) so why don't extend this with the qr too?
A murderer kills less than 1% of all the people they meet. Does that mean we should just accept their behavior?
What should have they done? Nothing? And what about all the dead piling in the streets and freezer trucks?
Speaking as someone who blends marketing/design/technical work I have a few thoughts on this.

First, there's pressure on a lot of marketers to sell more this month or this quarter.

Second, there's an expectation to prove that an idea is good using data and to prove the idea worked using data.

Third, there's very little interest in investing in the art side of the trade.

When taken together, you get what we've got.

What am I trying to say?

I guess just that in my experience it's always been the owners and top level managers pushing for short-term, unethical, bad ux decisions and focusing on manipulating instead of serving people.

And it sucks.

I think a lot of us got into marketing because we're creative and technical and wanting to make businesses and products better for people, both consumers and society at large.

Or maybe that's just me.

Edit: the worst part of it is the demoralizing realization that the owners are often right. Most people actually do want McDonalds, like shopping at Walmart/Amazon, and enjoy Facebook. So I guess the worst part about marketing, the part nobody talks much about, is that giving the majority of people what they want usually means low quality at the cheapest price.
> One of the major points I took away from Lessig’s Republic, Lost is that these campaign donations trackers are unable to factor in the credible threat of a donor funding an opponent.

They also aren't able to factor in independent expenditures (especially direct independent expenditures), or facilitation of donations (bundling) as opposed to direct donation, as well as the credible threat of doing those things, as well as direct donation, in the opposite direction.
I'm guessing you have no military experience carrying a weapon.

I do.

It is absolutely the duty of everyone carrying a weapon to employ that weapon in accordance with the rules of engagement and the law of war.
If only we'd knew if Musk goes long or short on BTC. It might be his plan to tie the TSLA stock price to BTC, and if the BTC crashes, so could the TSLA stock - opportunity for Musk to take TSLA of the public market by buying its stock out of his own pocket with the help of other investors? Who knows...
How does this work? They only have to find 1 bug and the entire case is dropped / postponed?
I would say it is like poker. If you put some chips in the pot at the beginning you feel more committed.
While away on vacation, I once sent $1000 in cold hard cash, on a Sunday, to an unbanked person in Los Angeles, in less than 1 hour, thanks to bitcoin and the recipient withdrawing it for cash at a Bitcoin ATM. There is not a single alternative service in the world that would have made this possible.

If people thought a little beyond their personal use cases, they would understand the utility of Bitcoin/crypto for many others. The technology is a paradigm shift. The financial world is structured as it is because of its existing flaws. Bitcoin/crypto enables things that people don't know they need because they are now possible.
I guess it is wise to sell when the market is greedy and buy when it is fearful, as long as you have the foundations in check.

I am more of a holder usually as well, unless I truly believe the price is so overvalued that it would take a lot of time before another full dip-rally cycle.
A scientific paper is just a glorified blogpost, in a subculture with peculiar rituals around writing blogposts.

Still, a scientific paper is not something you intend to make heaploads of money off, but a pop-sci book absolutely is - which makes the whole thing suspect.