skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Reminds me of good old Kerio Personal Firewall on Windows back in the 90s.

That was my first thought as well. Back then Kerio Personal Firewall was a godsend, and seeing live how much software (which on windows was 99.9% closed) was attempting to phone home behind the user, became an eye opener to many of us.
A simple thought experiment:

- Suppose you are spending 90% of your income on day-to-day expenses. Your margin of survival is 10%. Then there is 2% inflation. Now your margin of survival is ~8% which is a ~20% decrease.

- Suppose you are spending 20% of your income on day-to-day expenses. Your margin of survival is 80%. Then there is 2% inflation. Your margin of survival is still ~80% which is a negligible decrease.

For those who will say "wages catch up". They don't catch up for people on fixed income (welfare, retirement), and not catching up for the labor class is a policy feature: https://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/02/13/the-case-for-hi...

> Yet when you have very low inflation, getting relative wages right would require that a significant number of workers take wage cuts. So having a somewhat higher inflation rate would lead to lower unemployment...
You've already admitted you won't lift a finger to actually help the situation. Why would you expect your government to do anything if they're made up of people like you? Do you believe all those government workers exist on some other plane of moral relativism? Or do you think that laws and regulations magically come into being, like the zeitgeist just wills regulations into place?

The government does not sit around reading your mind and then make regulations to match it. Even if it could, it wouldn't. The government only creates a regulation when either a corporation or a very vocal coalition of people demand it. And those two parties are working against each other anyway, making it even less likely.

I really don't know how to explain it in simple enough terms. If you don't care, then neither does the society, and thus the government. Ergo, people like you are the reason the regulations don't exist and aren't enforced when they do.
There is a remorseless logic in a race to the bottom, though.

Anyone who eschews development of such military system risks becoming a toy of those who went all in.

The Armenians just lost a lot of territory in Nagorno Karabakh they considered their own - to an enemy who had suicide drones. Their country wasn't exactly big even before that loss.

Fifty other nations in potentially similar position looked at that war and its outcome. I doubt that their decisions were "let us stay moral and possibly be next on the chopping block".
I don't know about Lenovo, but my Dell machines have their OEM Windows keys stored in the BIOS. You can wipe Windows and reinstall it at any point with that key.
When the science doesn't match your preconceived notions
I agree it's somewhat weak on the historical trend argument, and in explaining the relevance of the interest rate to inflation argument.

> - Similarly, the arguments that COVID or Brexit should simply be blips seems like an outright denial that economic change happens. Wars, epidemics, and trade agreements shape history by reordering which economies are competitive.

He doesn't make a general case for such a denial. Only that COVID and Brexit are going to be blips specifically with respect to inflation. From the article:

> If either Brexit of coronavirus cause an inflation blip it will not last, and we need not worry about it in that case. So neither is the ‘something else’ that must be motivating inflation fears.

I found the arguments about the net money supply to be somewhat persuasive.

And as for alternative QE money being siphoned and being similarly regressive, I'm inclined to agree with the redistribution part of daniel-s's comment, and to infer that direct cash payments to individuals resist being siphoned so easily:

> Ultimately, printing money doesn't make anyone more productive or produce anything. All it does is redistribute wealth from those that were first to get the new free money away from those that were last to contact it.

Edit: I assumed this meant it redistributes to the first to contact it, but on second reading, I’m not sure the intended meaning.
Astronaut.io
There were several custom chips, so I doubt all parts exist.
They're in luck, because as long as there are people who aren't born into means there will be a steady supply of people who choose to join the military over other pursuits.
COVID++
There are mental health doctors as well.
That still doesn't mean that starting a bank in the US is harder (or at least as hard) than it is elsewhere, right? Or maybe that person owned banks all around the world?

From reading a little online, it sounds way easier to start a bank in the US than it is in Israel.
Monthly cost of a house tells you very little about the "true cost of ownership" (a concept that I wish were taught more widely). That includes things like taxes, opportunity cost of capital, maintenance, etc. Doubling the price of the house will not quite double the TCO (because maintenance may not increase by much depending on various factors, and taxes can take time to catch up), but it will not be a mere 25% increase either.
I guess so did machine guns and all ways to kill more people for cheaper and with more effectiveness (rockets, etc..). then again, it doesn't matter; they're here to stay, cat's out of the bag.
>There's also legitimate reasons to why these changes are necessary outside of some loud obnoxious screams from certain SJW-like people, that yes, are annoying to hear. Some of the response from our community to "push back against this" is just equally weird, tone deaf and childish however.

I understand your perspective. I'm not against changing the term. We changed it in our product a few years ago (master-slave to primary-secondary) as well ... primarily because even if you offend one (current or potential) customer it's just not a hill worth dying on.

But to address your point though, I wish there was some acknowledgment by 'the SJWs' (as you put it) that even if the term is archaic and should change, the tech community simply used a descriptive dictionary term for a particular architecture, and therefore the term is wholly unconnected to 'white supremacy' or 'systemic racism' or 'unconscious bias'. But for many who raise these issues, there is no good-will or charity. And that's why there is pushback. Many people don't want to accept the position that they were purposely insulting other people when these terms were in widespread use.
I have only iPhone XR and it took 14 ms. But my Linux on Asus A15 is a bit faster than your MacBook. It took 12 ms with battery power and 7 ms with a power cord connected.
>The only way to really reduce the energy use of coin is to reduce the block rewards or reduce the price.

You can rewrite difficulty formula and make it easier to mine and therefore decrease energy consumption. Bitcoin's protocol is set in stone but if some dev likes to play with protocol like Vitalik he or she can do it. It would shift market and coin price downwards but if energy consumption is really a problem it is tax you have to pay.

>There's no particular reason bitcoin's rewards are either not overkill or sufficient to secure the network against an attacker.

Satoshi introduced blockchain checkpoint which basically enforces consensus.

"The security safeguard makes it so even if someone does have more than 50% of the network's CPU power, they can't try to go back and redo the block chain" [1]

This is centralized decision but it is better than changing protocol completely like Vitalik did (going from PoW to PoS).

>because the currency has built-in adjustments which can be made by the foundation, in theory it can adjust the block reward dynamically to the right amount, though there's both political issues in terms of appeasing the miners when you cut their profit and technical issues in actually working out what is good enough.

So centralized foundation controls decentralized network? And what is right amount?

>But at a certain point it's more profitable to attack the system than secure it, so it's a difficult balancing act.

How come? When all coins are mined miners will switch to transaction fees and they will compete for transaction fees. If you want faster confirmation time you will pay higher transaction fee for your transaction meaning miners earning more, you can do this now as well.

>Likewise 'doing additional useful work' is not something you can actually do in a trustless manner like with proof of work

It doesn't have to be additional useful work it can be in the core design of the proof of work.

In 2013 there was a coin called Primecoin which "computed chains of prime numbers (Cunningham and bi-twin chains), the results of which were published on its blockchain's public ledger, available for use by scientists, mathematicians, and anyone else."[2]

"Use of a proof-of-work system to calculate chains of prime numbers was an innovation that produced useful results while also meeting the criteria for a proof-of-work system: it involved a calculation that was difficult to perform but easy to verify, and the difficulty was adjustable."

It was first coin which had a proof of work with a practical use.

It is still early days but this is the most recent paper I found about this matter: https://eprint.iacr.org/2017/203.pdf

[1] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=437.msg3807#msg3807

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primecoin
Wayland reflects status quo. Truly desired missing features are reimplemented — screenshots, screensharing, networking. Try to make a change, maybe you'd find out this feature is not that useful.

I'd better think why .Xresources never catched up. For example, I've downloaded Gnome theme. It contains some CSS files, a lot of images and some rc files. Or check about:config, chrome://flags/ — no images there, but interface is so much nicer than a list in man pages and plain text editing.
this is affirming the consequent. "liking bad things -> you are bad" might be true, but it does not imply "bad person liking thing -> thing is bad".
They’d also love Twitter.
Article like this takes months to put in. It takes one minute to put this disclaimer basically cancelling the article with "but we will tell you why we're cancelling it later".
Ha!

Yes, maintaining and understanding large software systems is a process that's very hard to understand and control, despite basic Computer Science being very well understood.
On a clear day this would definitely help however where I live in the UK there is frequent cloud cover. As the sun passes in and out of the clouds the light levels end up changing a surprising amount, causing frequent exposure flashes on the camera which essentially voids the calibration. In trying to achieve very high sensitivity I could not really make any kind of rolling calibration work sadly
Wish I could upvote more than once. Thank you, I will remember this every time productivity of my engineers is discussed.
This is NOT true. Message keys are never sent to the cloud in WhatsApp, no matter what.

You’re referring to the optional backup that requires users to opt-in. This sends an encrypted blob of all your messages to Apple/Google, and WhatsApp holds the key (but not the data) to that. Both companies would need to cooperate to read your messages, and this is OPT-IN by default.

This isn’t E2EE, but it’s opt-in by default. It also has nothing to do with the key exchange for E2EE messages.

You’re comparing WhatsApp, with all messages end-to-end encrypted and where the only way to compromise that is an opt-in cloud backup, to Telegram, where the vast majority of people (anyone using cloud chats) do not use Telegram’s encryption.

Full disclosure: I begrudgingly use WhatsApp. I really don’t like it. You’re spreading misinformation, though.
Master / slave are catch all terms versus more precise ones that represent the exact relationship of two systems.
There is a mention of the costs needed for storage in renewables that would keep the electricity under the operating cost of nuclear, albeit in a somewhat indirect way-

> It would often even be affordordable to pay 1 – 1.5 cents per kilowatt hour for electricity storage in addition to the generation costs for wind and solar power and still be below the operating costs of nuclear power plants. And here we have to ask the same question: How many emissions can I avoid with one euro, one dollar or one yuan?

I read that as meaning there is probably enough margin in the renewable cost to actually make money while storing electricity in batteries from wind and solar and selling it as a price below what nuclear costs to keep running. Unfortunately I am having trouble translating 1-1.5 cents/Kwhr to the current price of battery storage tech, and this doesn’t factor in the costs of creating these batteries at scale either, but the argument does say that’s likely to be cheaper.
Reminds me in a weird way of this episode: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0708414/

A culture has computer simulated war and “casualties” must report to euthanasia chambers.

This was the end result agreed to to stop actual bombings.

Of course, the officers disrupt it in the end. But it’d be interesting if they returned and nothing was left but craters.

More on topic, iron dome is an automated missile interception system and works well to protect Israelis from missile attacks. Just because a system is automated doesn’t necessarily mean it’s a bad idea, but obviously there’s high risk.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_Dome
Nuclear weapons are not necessary either, but they certainly do give an adversary pause when considering to attack you.

Autonomous weapon systems are no different. They raise the deterrence factor so that you are not likely to be attacked by simply having the capability and your adversary knowing that you have the capability.
> aiming for the legs

This doesn't make bullets any less lethal. If a bullet damages your femoral artery, you'll bleed out in minutes if not seconds.
Saving one of the world’s rarest toads from extinction
> There is nothing that says the printing of money in 2008 had to lead to immediate inflation

Which is exactly what Keynesians were saying. The Monetarists said otherwise. Guess who was right?

> and in fact we’ve seen the prices of some things (real estate?) go up astronomically the past 13 years.

Those "things" which have risen in price does not count as inflation. It has never counted as inflation. There is a different word that should be used for that phenomenon:

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_bubble

I do not understand why this is difficult to understand: inflation/CPI is the cost of goods and services that are used on a daily/weekly/monthly basis. Asset prices are not one of those things.

Please stop using "inflation" when it comes to asset prices, as it does not apply. It's like pointing to a Boeing 787 and saying "boat".

> In economics you’re right until suddenly you’re not.

In economics, at least "good" economics, there are models. These models describe reality: some models are better than others. We should follow the ones that make (more) accurate predictions.

Keynesian models (for example) had problems with stagflation in the early 1970s, but by 1978 most text books had explanation as to why the earlier models broke down, and why the phenomenon occurred in the first place:

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stagflation#Neo-Keynesianism

Some folks' models said inflation would occur from money printing post-2008; others' models said it was not. One group was right, and the other was wrong.

Similarly: a bunch of folks are worried about inflation after the US Congress passed the $1.9T rescue plan, others are not. This is an(other) experiment in which some folks will be right, and others wrong.

Whose model best/better describes (economic) reality?

AFAICT, the Keynesians have been right more than any other school of though. I'm sure they may/will be wrong at some point, but hopefully something will be learned and models improved.
Right and you can also buy a cheap print of an expensive, famous piece and hang it on your wall. In fact, people do it all the time! Doesn’t diminish the value of the original.
Thanks for the kind words!

I suppose if you use Firefox and already know how to use Pocket, this may be true. I've never used Pocket, though. I would imagine the same is true of many of the potential users of Link Lock who want to hide their locked bookmarks.

This is different because it works in Chrome and Firefox with no dependencies on extensions. (It likely works in Safari too, but I don't have a Mac with which to test it.)
Light and dark / white and black have been symbols of good and bad from long time, is that racist?
I didn't know about the story yet, but the reality was already very close to that terrible scenario: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bachem_Ba_349
(One of the launch sites is quite close to where I live)
As someone stuck on old (HughesNet) satellite internet and waiting on my Starlink pre-order, this is great news. I didn’t get into the beta sadly, though I was signed up and in the eligibility area since day 1.
That is a fallacy. It's like saying that something is unhackable because it has not been hacked.
"Borders all over the world" don't typically have Hezbollah shooting rockets over the border into civilian areas on a regular basis. This is a very unique scenario, and the best response to arbitrary rocket fire, if possible, is an automated and precise response. I highly doubt they're inventing these technologies for fun... there is a defensive need. It is a morally complex issue, because the whole scenario is more intricate than it seems you believe it to be.
Satellites, aircraft, and navies exist, and can detect violations and force the perpetrators away.

Doing so pervasively costs a lot of money, though; no country seems to be as rich as to engage in such enforcement with enough strictness.
Actually copied from Wikipedia, hence the left in citation markers, but Wikipedia's citations are:

1: Mícheál Ó Siochrú/RTÉ ONE, Cromwell in Ireland Part 2. Broadcast 16 September 2008.

2: O'Callaghan, Sean (2000). To Hell or Barbados. Brandon. p. 85. ISBN 978-0-86322-272-6.

3: Higman, B. W. (1997). Knight, Franklin W. (ed.). General History of the Caribbean: The slave societies of the Caribbean. 3 (illustrated ed.). UNESCO. pp. 107, 108]. ISBN 978-0-333-65605-1.

The 15-80% figure sources are:

15–25% Padraig Lenihan, Confederate Catholics at War, p112

50%: The History and Social Influence of the Potato, Redcliffe N. Salaman, Edited by JG Hawkes, 9780521316231, Cambridge University Press
How many died during Cromwell’s campaign?

83%: The Cromwellian Settlement of Ireland by John Patrick Prendergast

I would suspect perhaps that the 83% figure is probably going so far as to blame Cromwell for The Great Famine of 1845, and definitely his "to hell or to Connacht" campaign of dispossessing native Irish landowners was a contributing factor in the economic structure that led to it, but I think 200 years apart is enough to not directly attribute that as "deaths to Cromwell's invasion".
I think the parent post was talking about the Israeli market. There is no Privacy.com, Revolut etc in Israel.
Calling the Docker CLI from Python with Python-on-Whales
i take your point, but they're not prison fences. Lets be clear about that.
>> This isn’t a fantasy. It’s simply a fact when you have a huge number of people owning guns, implementing a dictatorship is harder.

> I'm from a former communist country. We had anti-communist gorilla fighters to the mid fifties. Guess what, the gorillas were hunted down and neutralized one by one.

What proportion of the population were those fighters? It's obvious that a small poorly-supplied force can't stand up to a brutal state, on the other hand "a huge number" of armed people might be able to, or at least put up a respectable fight. Furthermore, there's a deterrent effect from having an armed population that has to be taken into account.
My high school daughter has really gotten into astronomy and space in the last few years, and is torn between celebrating the 9th use of the same first-stage rocket and hating the pieces of space junk it’s delivering to low earth orbit.
Same question for that wallet
Unfortunately you're more likely to just find confirmation bias here. The HN community (and the tech community in general) is predominantly pro-nuclear.

Personally, I think this article raises great points. If we could rewrite history and have built a thriving nuclear power industry 20 years ago, we'd probably be in much better shape now, at least with respect to climate change

But that's not what happened. Given the current state of the industry we can't afford to spend decades trying to right the technical and regulatory wrongs of the past now that renewables are becoming truly viable.
Sure. The existing terms are a little quirky and you can make the argument that 'allow' and 'deny' lists make more sense ... but come on man, why be obtuse? You know that's not why these terms are being changed.
Then get a job here: https://startworkingremotely.com/jobs?q=flask+python
I guess the thing is that if we’re not sure whether or not what we’re saying is true, it can be considerate to phrase it that way, e.g. “I think ripgrep’s regex library is written in C” rather than stating it as a fact. While it is particularly likely that folks on this website will correct mistaken statements, stating them as fact seems more likely to potentially spread misinformation.

But anyways, cheers and good luck with your programming language!
What part of this link proves Israel is not trying to avoid casualties?

At no point I’m saying there’s not casualties, including civilian casualties, including horrible mistakes, including trigger happy psychos that make it through the ranks.

But the imbalance of casualties is the result of Israel being better at it.

It would be great if there was peace. But even if I ran Israel and the Palestinian Territories as a dictatorship tomorrow I still wouldn’t be able to turn all violence to zero.

Personally, as an Israeli I would love for Israel to evacuate settlements. But pretending that would bring peace is not even naive, it just doesn’t align with anything anyone involved is saying.
> I'm not making a political statement, but just look how many illegal immigrants get into US, EU, etc.

That's not inefficient/ineffective, the system is just optimized for different things. It ensures a cheap and compliant labor force for things like agriculture.
"wartime mistakes" is a nice euphemism. And I'm sure that people will continue be held to account. For instance when somebody whoopsies and dronestrikes a wedding party in Jemen.
There's a brilliant short film on the subject of autonomous weapons, "slautherbots": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9fa9lVwHHqg
> I have a feeling that humans will remain overwhelmingly responsible for most of the wartime mistakes.

Of course we will. It's not as though they're programming themselves. Somebody has to tell the computer what to do.
That’s one reason why APL and its descendants are so powerful in the hands of people who have become fluent in viewing computation through the lens of arrays.
Largest wipe of any species: Coral Bleaching
Cantillon Effect getting into full swing.
I'm keen to see Starlink deals with government censorship requests. Can a country even effectively enforce their requests? How will China enforce the Great Firewall for instance?
$5 wrench*

Far easier with bitcoin than in the olden days when you had to physically transfer cash (and then have the issue of laundering it)

* https://xkcd.com/538/
That's way too simplistic. If one of these drones could have killed Hitler and saved millions of innocent people, would you still say it's not ethical?

The reason to dislike these machines is because of the practical problem of making sure they only target bad-guys. That said... their continued development and deployment is essentially inevitable anyway.