skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> The CFAA angle would be that participation in ads/tacking was part of the contract for accessing the 'free' service, that by blocking ads or sending false info the user is using a false credential to access the service.

I'm horrified whenever I see people having this perception of the issue, and worried that it'll get accepted by the legal system as the correct view.

From my POV, the only contract that exists between me and a random ad-loaded website is the one negotiated between my computer and their server - that is, the HTTP protocol, which clearly stipulates that I can render any reply you send me in whatever way I like. This contract provides many tools for expressing the intent of gating content behind some requirements (like payment, or receiving different content first), but the common rule is: you don't send the content you're gating before the client proves they've met the requirements.

And honestly, I'd consider mixing ads into content to be borderline CFAA (the ads themselves being abusive and often fraudlent, and sometimes malware) - and sending software intending to compromise my user agent (like trackers, or ad-blocking busters) to be crossing the CFAA line. Unfortunately, I don't think the lawyers would agree with me :(.
Ah yes, the daily Bitcoin attack astroturf.
Bullshit. Such correlation cannot be established by scientific method (reproducible experiments). It just abstract bullshitting we call models.

Even if there is a correlation (there isn't one) the causation must be established separately by scientific evidence.
This is interesting coming from an organization that may well be a cause of inequalities...
Is this just because Jack Dorsey likes Jay-Z or what? I can't imagine what acquiring a niche streaming service is going to achieve for Square
Commercial Only LTS Qt 5.15.3 Released
AI-powered, privacy-preserving ads at IMGZ
to me it’s an important aspect. try as we might, we’ll still be subject to planetary forces outside of our control.

the planet is warming. we can delay it for a bit, but the planet will continue to warm no matter what we do.

of course we should manage our impact on the planet. but this will represent just a small delay in the grand scheme of things. a few generations, maybe even a few thousand years as you’ve put it.

but a multi generational effort to tackle either moving to a different planet or something like living underground will be needed.

unfortunately our extremely limited existence will make these efforts extremely hard to tackle.
Thicker skin doesn't help people who get offended for publicity.
I’ll never use this. But the ingenuity to bend Python to the author’s will is admirable.
> EVs still require nearly as much servicing as ICE cars

This is not true at all. My daily driving 2013 EV with 90k miles still has the original tires and brakes. There's no oil to change and only a handful of mechanical components. The only think I've had to service is the 12v battery.
1979: The Cave of Time
Does ThredUp partner with thrift stores across the country?
Unfortunately this version 15 is deployed in production already and it will be very difficult to fix it :-(
I’m getting 170 gflops on my iphone 7, so that mac is like ~5 times faster at this task than my 5 years old phone?

I gotta run the test on my desktop pc to decide how to feel about this.
Do you deny that hydro is cheap or do you claim that miners choose to use power in more expensive locations?
EVs are great for efficiency, sustainability, and the environment, but they're going to eliminate a ton of jobs all across the automotive industry. They require less repairs, no oil changes, less maintenance, no gas stations, etc.
This is not reddit, please stop with the conspiracy theories
Not for nothing but because that is close to a slur (and would probably be pronounced the same way), that’s probably not a good choice.
So what do you propose we do? Do we create the energy police and tell people what you can and cannot do with energy? Do we stop people from mindlessly browsing the internet?

This argument really annoys me because, bitcoin has a purpose, I can buy things with bitcoin, just take a walk in Huaqiangbei and see how many shops accept bitcoin, talk to the people who's governments failed their national currency and they will agree the energy we spend on bitcoin helps them.

Until btc is replaced with a POS crypto currency like cardano[1] the energy we spend on btc is worth it for the people using it.

[1]https://ucarecdn.com/8673f817-d83b-441a-8281-45e8ae68bbec/-/...
Did you read the article, or just the abstract? Do you have any specific points to refute or insights to add? Or is your comment not constructive and just sensationalist propaganda? And I ask this as someone who would benefit from BTC going up relative to USD.
Same reason as code golf or IOCCC I guess. To show that it can be done.
You haven't really explained what you mean. Basically I said the UX was adequate, you said it's not.

I'll elaborate: human error is not all reducible to a UX problem, at least not in any meaningful sense in casting blame at AWS here for causing the user's error. Giving users an explanation of their actions at the top of the page is not particularly bad UX, it seems adequate. If course they could do more, modals that say "here's your estimated costs for the action you're taking" and that might be better. But then again that might not be practical across the range of AWS modules, and a user that if ignores their bills and bank statements for most of a year might easily ignore those notices as well.

If you define every mistake a user makes as a UX problem then you've defined it broadly enough that it loses meaning. I doubt that's you're overall intent, but in claiming the user's failure to read the top of the page was a UX problem you're crossing over into that territory.

I might be more sympathetic if the user wasn't so lacking in awareness that they also didn't read their bills and bank statements for so many months, and didn't take the hour of time upfront that was ultimately necessary to understand part of a massively complex system. No reasonable level of UX design would have fixed all of that.
Because it's worth scrutinizing?
I spent the first months 2020 building out a database-as-a-service offering that runs in AWS, Azure and GCP (think Cockroach Cloud or MongoDb Atlas model, but for a different database).

That was an instructive project - building the same service in three clouds tells you a lot both about:

- The quality and completeness of foundational services (identity, networking, compute, storage)

- The tooling ecosystem (the quality of the Packer builders and Terraform providers [1] in our case)

- How helpful (or existent) support is, which ranged from an account manager telling us up-front “here’s the way to avoid hitting limits for your design” to not being able to talk to a human at all throughout the entire project, and thus having to phase in beta customer onboarding for that cloud because of the arbitrary limits.

At some point that team should write a full retrospective on this.

[1]: Disclaimer - I have worked on both Packer and Terraform in the past at HashiCorp.
Your idea sounds great.

But it is not at all what this product is.
> Power usage is proportional to Bitcoin value

Not precise enough. Power usage is proportional to block reward USD value, which is proportional to BTC value. But once in 4 years number of BTC awarded for mining a block is halved.
It’s easy and cheap because it is bypassing all the money laundering, KYC, and other money movement rules.
Any legitimate use of cryptocurrency will never materialize as long as people are gambling with them.

The intrinsic value of Bitcoin is nowhere near the current price. When the speculators all sell and the only demand comes from people looking to actually use them, the price will drop by a lot.

But, when that happens, the speculators/grifters will simply move to another coin. That other coin will see a similar bubble, and bitcoin’s value will drop even further as people perceive it as “dead” or worthless (as maybe it should have always been perceived)

So until this shit gets under control somehow, cryptocurrency is going to remain the exclusive domain of the speculator/gambler/criminal/grifter/gullible. And of course, the world will suffer increased energy usage, pollution, and GPU shortages.
Well, there's at least one speculator (myself) who is also using BTC as a hedge against an uncertain petrodollar. Metals and volatility funds also are purely speculative assets - risk mitigation itself is tangible value.
Chances are it’s something we cannot see. Technology, people, an existing deal or relationship with someone Square wants to be close to.
I think that its fairly notable that functionality, that have been arround for so long, and have been implemented so many times, is as poorly implemented as this.

Usually you can count on the C std lib to be very optimized. Many std functions like memcpy are even intrinsics in compiles, and than means they are literally faster then its possible to write in C since someone has gone in and hand optimized the assembler.
A decent GPU on a desktop will destroy it, but that's not the point. The point is the power/performance ratio. The M1 hits this while barely getting warm, while the PC requires active cooling and uses 200+ watts. Put a 40Tflops PC GPU on your lap and it will brand a stamp of the laptop's bottom cover onto your thighs.
The burden is on both people making statements/claims.
aren't Ethernet frames CRC'd? Are there other checksums down the call stack, or up the stack at the other end, that would reject such bit flips in the raw data?
they could still make money from transaction fees. Thats the plan for bitcoin after 2140
I use adblocking and turn off JavaScript and can access their site fine.
What is the chace of RISC-V becoming and x86 or arm alternative free from binary blobs and (IME|PSP)-like traps?
Obviously yes.

The mindset of "experiments aren't a failure if we learned something" seems to be eluding yet another commentator.

To be fair, it also seems to elude most of academic publishing.
Smaller than the energy required to run Ireland, unlike bitcoin. An algorithm designed to be wasteful in energy wasting energy is not something we should be shocked at.
I see that claim about hydro all the time but I've never seen a quantitative study, can you link one?

According to the BBC, a recent survey found that Bitcoin is powered by two-thirds fossil: https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-56215787

Inner Mongolia just announced it will shut down Bitcoin miners, apparently on climate grounds: https://news.bitcoin.com/chinas-inner-mongolia-plans-to-shut...
Check this crypto trading bots
This is one of the best crypto trading bots that enables you to manage your risk with ease. This application allows you to choose the strategy that suits your trading style. It enables you to set your target profit amount and close the deal at the right moment.
Terrible article imho. Low effort on the research, the only negative (presumably the basis of the question in the title): "maybe NASA wont like prototyping?"
Cool. Lets do AI and video rendering next.
>Even as a European citizen, I have faith that the US Dollar will stay the US dollar, and keep value.

Clearly the market doesn't think so. Nearly every asset class is getting inflated in the past year, in the middle of a pandemic no less.
Startup has an intriguing concept for EV battery swaps
Data storage is in fact not a property of a blockchain. There is nothing that prevents data in a blockchain to be lost other than the fact that many people store it, which is not guaranteed at all.

DLTs (blockchains) solve the double spending problem in a decentral (trustless) way. Thats "the definition" and what separates it from other similar tech like git or synced databases.
Yes this discussion has happened hundreds of times on HN at this point.

> "Bitcoin uses too much energy[1]"

> "It's only using surplus energy which would go to waste anyway[2][3]"

> "But it still has an environmental impact [4]"

I guess I'm just tired of seeing the same things repeated on every single thread about Bitcoin. When I saw a lazy comment like OPs, I overreacted, sorry.

[1] https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-56012952#:~:text=Cambrid....
[2] https://www.coindesk.com/the-last-word-on-bitcoins-energy-co...
[3] https://www.wsj.com/articles/bitcoin-in-the-wilderness-11553...
[4] https://www.cnbc.com/2021/02/05/bitcoin-btc-surge-renews-wor....
Miners don't care/get a choice. They plug their machines into the nearest wall socket.
As European citizen I don't really trust the Euros or Dollars. Just think about the loss in value If you own money. Even if the official 2% inflation, its still 2% lost of value. And now with Corona they printing billions of Euros and the inlfation will stay at 2% ... sure.
That would be great. But isn't there a danger, that such a CPU, at least if implemented naievely, would basically mostly idle, since modern OoO processors schedule memory access dynamically? For hard real-time tasks, some CPUs don't have caches, to make timing more predictable, but there is a heavy performance penalty to be paid for that predictability.

Are you familiar with works like [1]? That is thinking in this direction, but from a different angle.

[1] G. Heiser, G. Klein, T. Murray, Can We Prove Time Protection?. https://arxiv.org/pdf/1901.08338.pdf
Cool, but it is not a great idea to try to move high-performance computing to the browser.
sigh

I'll do it if nobody else will.

https://github.com/godotengine/godot-docs/pull/4722
> since I'm massively underestimating the impact the s/pandemic/lockdown has had on a large part of the population

Not having money or a stable income causes people to not have kids.
Simply take a moment to see how that argument works with other kinds of assets and you will see how it doesn't make any sense.

Gold is a speculative asset that also has some limited tangible uses too. So does that mean gold has less reasons to decrease in price than an asset which only has tangible uses and no speculation?
i think the value add is square adding financial tools for artist payout, but it's more just jack wanted it and jay-z is a buddy so...
Lol, if you think cryptocurrency doesn't fund war.
Similarly, Hulu started sending me engagement notifications. It has no notification controls so I disabled notifications entirely.

Apps are almost as bad as websites in terms of my willingness to let them send notifications at this point.
I'm assuming you're mainly focusing on software product architecture, There are a few trends which are currently widely adopted. one of them is the microservices architecture
this link explains some of the widely used architectures and gives a few examples along with use cases (https://techbeacon.com/app-dev-testing/top-5-software-archit...)
each of the mentioned architecture is vast enough to warrant a few books on each of the architecture. So I would recommend reading into what you might want master, as mastering all of it would require fair amount of time and effort.
The principles mentioned can be applied to database design methodologies as well.

If you have to break it down in terms of raw basics, what approach you choose largely depends on what you want to achieve. Performance or security. wanting both requires large amount of human as well as computing resources.
As a general example, consider node or apache, node gives you a performance improvement in terms of raw latency and concurrency by a factor of ~20-100 (based on a few simple tests i've done using apache bench) in most scenarios compared to apache but in terms of reliability, if your code for any reason doesn't handle exceptions, it takes down your entire server/service. With apache, that wont happen, your perfomance degrades, some users might get affected but the service as a whole would still be operational. This is just an example, most of the technology out there is about making the choice on what you're okay with comprimising with the available resources (human and computational) that you have.
This is just my view on it.
While this is sad, this is a self correcting problem. Miners and other people using bitcoins are going to get tired at some point of the loss from buying all this energy to keep their bitcoin assets going.

The most scary part of cryptocoins is the deflationary cycle that makes these crypto asset potentially displace productive investment on an economy wide scale.

This is not self correcting. This is Moloch, it's a prisoner's dilemma, a bad Nash equilibrium where the incentives are to keep the vicious cycle going as long as possible because the first to leave the cycle are disadvantaged.

This is mostly a worry if many companies do like Tesla and jump on the band wagon. They may be tempted at an economy wide scale to reduce investment in production in order to hoard cryptocoins instead. This dynamic caused the great depression in the 1930s when businesses switched to hoarding gold tied currency instead of producing.

Now I'm not sure that crypto coins without being jacked up by central banks (like gold was during the great depression) are a powerful enough force to cause the type of havoc that gold did.

Then again, the potentially stronger network/memetic effects of cryptocoins, along with the amplification factor from markets being synchronized through instant global communications nowadays might make them dangerous to the economy even without central bank involvement. We saw how much people got hypnotized during the Gamestop episode. I don't think unsophisticated investors' hoarding is enough to cause problems but it is a bit unsettling that Tesla and other companies are starting to hoard. If enough businesses follow suit, you get into scary territory (It would also be worrisome if companies widely moved to add billions in gold to their balance sheet but the lesson has been learned in the 1930s with gold).

In theory, if central banks stay stimulative enough through all this, you can maintain growth in both productive businesses and crypto. As long as these central banks don't flinch at the sight of what may look like crypto bubbles.
There are literally thousands of alternatives to Bitcoin, who bring the same "economic empowerment".

I can get instant, zero comission transfers with Nano, without banks. I assume there are many other cryptos like this one.

As skeptic I am about the survival of cryptos to regulators and big whales, I am actually using Nano to transfer money to people in LATAM, but as far as it becomes volatile or if it changed and had feeds, I'd just abandon it.

What's the point of bitcoin now, seriously. POW, very slow, very high transactions fees... ¿What does Bitcoin bring to the table? "Adoption" one would say, but no one is using Bitcoin to pay for anything, so the crypto enthusiasts changed the narrative to "store of value".

There are far better choices than bitcoin in and out of the crypto ecosystem for pretty much every use-case you can imagine. And the only reasons Bitcoin isn't in the ground it's because there's a lot of people invested with hope of selling for a profit.
Im gonna throw my speculation, is it to attempt to implement a crypto method of payment to musicians through Tidal?
> Most of this electricity comes from the cheapest source of power, which is hydro.

This is not actually true. And even if it were, it is irrelevant. If crypto uses green energy, it displaces other users to use more dirty energy.

The environmental cost of crypto is not that of the energy it uses, it is that of the dirtiest energy it displaces other users onto.

(Crypto also uses massive amounts of dirty energy directly. The idea that crypto uses green energy is basically a lie.)
That's a bad wager to make. In B2B it's not unusual for small, under-resourced companies to have big customers that all require an integration with their own identity solutions.
Birthrates are a powerful, but lagging/post-hoc indicator of public policy effects. It's worth noting that we tend to associate high birthrates with poverty and negative social outcomes. Except, when rates are low we (western countries) use immigration from high-birthrate societies to shore up the population replacement rate, as the article notes. When you look at who is having kids in the US and Canada, the families, (or specifically, women) who have 2 or more children are either exceptionally wealthy (90th+ pc) or exceptionally poor.

I'd speculate this is because if you are either rich or poor you have stability in that your life circumstances aren't going to change that radically, and hypothesize it's mainly educated middle class people who are having kids below the population replacement rate, if at all, because their lives do not find a relatively stable equilibrium. The mix of the promise of upward mobility that is always just out of reach, and the risk of "losing it all," creates a condition of constant low-level stress similar to other species that do not breed in captivity.

If you have the Malthusian or environmentalist worldview that fewer people is better, this is a positive (if cynical) development. But even that's not going to work because public debt and entitlements mean shoring up a replacement rate population with immigration from high-birthrate societies. The other thing is the people who are having kids create even more polarized opportunity, where the life outcomes of a 3-kid wealthy home vs. the outcomes of a 3-kid working class or public-dependent home are going to be alien to each other. An (increasingly rare) person from a single-kid middle class home is not only a social minority, but has to create more of their own opportunities because they are an outsider to both societies.

IMO, the covid baby bust is only a symptom of a much larger and longer term macro-decline, and just the beginning of the real and inevitable consequences of the post-war baby-boom generation.
> it solves a very real problem of how to prevent bitrot in the long term storage of data for example

That's the first time I've seen "blockchain" and "bitrot" in the same sentence. And I fail to see the connection, unless you reduce "blockchain" to mean "copying data over and over", at which point there are many other, better solutions.
That it more an effect of how we use them in computer geometry. Unit quaternions with ijk plus real map to an xyz tilt plus a rotor. But I believe you could pick any such mapping.

On the other hand, dual quaternions do care which is the dual component, since multiplying by complex numbers looks like true rotation, while multiplying by a dual looks like rotation around a point at infinity, aka translation.

So in that case maybe there is something special about the real component.
My initial impression was that it's pretty nifty and fun to watch but of questionable value other than perhaps removing the need for a frame. But I wonder if there could be multiple print head sets on the same rail, each with its own filament, making multiple color or multiple material prints easier to achieve. Going to another level, multiple rails, each with multiple print sets could enable even more materials and colors. Coordination with each getting out of the way of the other would be an issue, as might be stringing and cohesion between differing materials. Still it's an interesting development with some great possibilities.