skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
>> Markets are efficient.

They are certainly great at turning air into gold. Maybe that was always their true purpose.
It's on the Binance wikipedia page.
Would you rather own crude or DOGE, the official currency of Mars?
I'd also suggest that cellular automata are now an important area of theoretical Comp Sci (and a number of related fields). Wolfram's contribution in that area compares quite favorably with the pioneering work by Von Neumann and Conway, providing a lot of the foundation for systematic study of those types of system.
That is a guess made by one person. The article doesn't indicate that they really say down and did the math.
Things precede shelter in the hierarchy of needs yet shelter is still valuable. Also there are shades of shelter. Most people might not want to live in the trailer park of money.
Ah, I only use open.spotify.com. Still, without scraping it/api access, there's no way to see a distribution AFAIK.
That equalizer curve for the Rock preset is burnt into my memory, its shape, and color, and positions of sliders.

Say what you want about the skeuomorphic design, but it really felt great to slide the volume a bit higher when at your favorite part of the song. It really felt like a piece of hardware in your hands.
I've pointed out before that the job description of "Systems Analyst" seems to have disappeared i.e. someone who's job it was to understand and describe requirements. I agree with you about the baby and the bathwater, though to be fair there was often quite a bit of bathwater.
I’m a native speaker of both English and German and it was striking to me when I was learning to write.
Newly Identified Ant Is Named After Missouri S&T Biologist
Pretty sure what they mean is 'do you refuse it as payment?' - i.e. should you provide the thing someone is paying for or send the payment back and ask for untainted coins?
The list of unstable features they want to use is interesting:

https://github.com/Rust-for-Linux/linux/issues/2
What an interesting comment, thanks for taking the time to write it.

> That's irrelevant, as the program can't be derived from the rules. To understand the behavior of the program (the universe) you need to know both the rules (physical laws) and the source code of the program (physical constants/quantities).

This does not remove the fact that the universe could be built from a very few simple laws. (my first and only point in my previous comment)

As with softwares, even if we do not know the 'source code' we can infer it. How? By designing experiments. There are then three possibilities:

1. Every experiment confirm our theory, in this case we believe with a certain degree of certitude that the model is a good approximation of the reality,

2. An experiment give results that do not correspond to our model, then we need to change or improve our model,

3. Two experiments on the same phenomenon give contradicting results. We finally found a bug, the behavior is undefined, maybe our universe collapse, maybe we are in a giant simulation and we found a limits of higher floating point numbers.

> This is similar to QM and the Standard Model. QM has a very elegant set of simple rules of motion that describe how particles interact. But there are infinitely many possibile universes that behave according to Schrodinger's equation. To see how our universe behaves, you also need the Standard Model, with its dozens of particles and relationships between them and constants and dimensions.

I do not see exactly why it is relevant but I would add that the standard model in not enough, lots of things exists in physics where we cannot define an experiment to decide what is the (our) reality. But we do not really care because the realities are somewhat equivalent.

> In contrast, String Theory only has one 'particle', the string,...

I will not address this comment. I think your point is that physics can be defined experimentally or mathematically and the mathematical version has more chances to be wrong because the minimum set or rules are more arbitrary?

> There's a good chance Wolfram's models will turn up the same way - a new mathematical formalism that, if you plug in all of the constants of the Standard Model, predicts the Standard Model precisely.

Sure there are chances that string theory and Wolfram's theory are a game of the mind and they are fundamentally flawed. But it is also true that if you chose well your first principles and they are easy enough, if both theories can be used to infer a wide variety of phenomenas, there is a good chance that there is an isomorphism between the first principles and they are equivalent in essence, so why bother, go for the system you believe in, hope to make great discoveries and one day, maybe, your theory will be merged with a better theory, but it is rarely lost. Theories are adapted and improved ;)
Cars kill people. We don't pull them off the road to save a life.
Personally I'd prefer if comments displayed upvotes and downvotes as separate tallies instead of a total. It means something very different if a post as a lot of up and down votes that sum to about zero or if it has no votes at all.
We are still talking about criminals. By "well worth optimizing", I meant worth to them.

I'm not defending that Bitcoin is a solution to moving money, I'm attacking what I perceived to be an argument that it's not a problem for dealers because they can just do to cash as they do to drugs.
I hadn't heard of rodata before, but based on a quick Google, I think what you're describing is similar to Cow<str>. I can't speak to the reasons why this wasn't made the default, but I believe it is at least possible.
The elementary particles are the objects that the rules operate on, not the rules themselves. This argument makes no sense. Photons are terribly small, but a computer screen can well arrange them so that they move according to extremely complex rules (e.g. the photons coming out of my phone screen are obeying the rules encoded on Hacker News's server).
It handled the black swan event of complete market crash at the beginning of the pandemic pretty easily. And the other thing is Bitcoin's market cap is well over 1T$ now, as expected the volatility goes down as the market cap goes up. I suspect those ratios are going to come down significantly within couple of years.
If half the company isn't reading this thread I would be shocked. They came from YC and they're mostly a bunch of nerds like us.
If they were send to you, someone does process them.
In Rust a slice `&[T]` is a fixed length sequence of `T`s laid out linearly in memory. Every `T` is required to be of the same size.

Strings in Rust are (normally) represented as UTF-8. Both `String` and `str` represent data that is guaranteed to be valid UTF-8.

This means that if Rusts UTF-8 strings were represented as normal slices, they would have to be slices of UTF-8 code-units.

Rust wants to provide a safe and correct String data type, and therefore, indexing a string on a byte (code-unit) level would be incorrect behavior.

Having a custom type `String` and `str` instead of just a `Vec<u8>` enables you to have more correct behavior implemented on top of the data type that doesn't implement normal slice indexing and such.

---

As a note, even though you probably don't want to normally, you can quite easily access the backing data of your string using `String::as_bytes`
> we cannot manually fix some minor mistakes of ours when creating resources because that'll mess up terraform

In my opinion if you're doing manual fixes you're doing it wrong. Let's say you do your manual fix in your Dev environment. Do you remember to do it in Prod/whatever other environments you have? Are you sure you did the EXACT same thing? Did you change 5 other things trying to fix it first?

You end up with so many different deployment environments that are unique 'snowflakes', and when something breaks in one it might not affect the others cause they're in totally different states.

It's a nightmare.

In my opinion, infrastructure as code is the only way to do it in a serious environment.
I'm glad we agree, then, that Algorand is just as vulnerable as all the rest of the PoS systems.
Monero is mostly traceable still.

Source:
https://www.sciendo.com/article/10.1515/popets-2018-0025
This seems like a lot of alarmism without concrete arguments as to why the robot dog is problematic. It also seems like an honest article should make a better attempt to represent the benefits or uses of such a device.
> Yes

That's good enough for me to spend $3. Thanks so much. I dug into how this particular app works, and it turns out those iOS restrictions are still in place- but the app developer is clever, and is literally turning our prefix blocks into millions of actual blocked numbers. And while he can't intercept calls, he CAN manually add and remove numbers from the built-in system block list.

Madness! But it actually works!
No they are turning gold into bitcoin. :)
A $20 gift card is great for those things. Then, it doesn’t matter whether you remember to cancel.
I splashed out for an OP-1 but I bought it from Amazon rather than straight from Teenage Engineering. It was still sold under their store name, it seemed.

The best £1000 I've ever wasted, and kept the box for, just in case. It's a beautiful bit of kit (and it has the clicky controls) but I've still not become proficient enough to do anything but treat it as a toy. One day... one day... I'll make something practical using it.

Suffice to say, this is not the next Marc Rebillet speaking.
Genuinely curious: What are some challenges with using distributed databases?
https://www.hackthebox.eu/ comes to mind
> Full disclosure: I'm a former EM for the Unity dev team.

The real problem here is you had an extremely enthusiastic fan base and chose to break everything for many of us.

I tried really hard to like it but for me it was broken and unlike in KDE where I can tweak anything there was no way to fix alt-tab.

Such a minor thing, such a major productivity killer for those of us who rely on years of keyboard experience.
Also Palantir and Roblox - I think it's the way forward for most companies. Spotify was the first and the others have had slight variation to terms, but the core idea is good.
Missing a lot of signals from the in vivo context - for example taking a naive approach to organoids typically means you’re going to be missing vascularization, which is essential for the architecture of the brain in vivo.

Also typically organoids present as very immature brains, whereas Alzheimer's patients sort of have "maximally mature" brains.
> themselves based on Jungian archetypes

Which has always amused me, given that Edward L. Bernays was Freud’s nephew.
I’m not an expert, but suppose Alzheimer’s onset and progression is affected by the gut-brain axis. There’s no way for an organoid to capture that.
the salt on this board when it comes to crypto only gets worse as time goes on
just turn off your internet already if you can't ignore people.
I think HN does it better than reddit, where the comments are hidden quickly once negative, but I've seen a lot of comments edited based on downvotes as people wonder what, exactly, other users are disagreeing with. Doesn't exactly contribute other than to say 'your opinion is wrong.'
It's All About Berlin, not my personal blog
Painfully cool. Wow
I'm open to having misinterpreted the situation. How is corporate personhood not the same as a corporation being a legal person? I mean functionally, not semantically. If you would, help me understand why this is not a difference without distinction.

Please note I didn't pass any judgement on whether a corporate person is a useful construct or whether it should be abolished. I agree it serves a purpose and should continue to exist.

What I would argue is "limited liability" as it applies to and shields company owners shouldn't mean "free from consequences" for the corporation as an aggregate. If I'm reading your post correctly, we don't disagree there.
Has anyone not had suicidal thoughts since the lockdown?
> As long as there are millions of transactions going on, the business model will stay 'efficient'.

I have a timeshare to sell you.
Rather than use high engagement as a basis for vouching, arbitrarily selected communities, perhaps of about 50--150 active participants (posting or moderating) might be better. Think Mastodon, but in order to be federated, good posts must be "voted off the island", in the good sense.

I've been applying a somewhat similar notion to collecting and managing reading material and suggestions, what I call BOTI, or Best of the Interval. It's a round-robin style system (think "43 Folders" from GTD), where I compile a list of references over a period of time (monthly to annually seems to be most appropriate for me, though hour / day / week / month / year / decade / ... could be applied). At the end of an interval, some limited number of items is carried forward.

This is one way of addressing the "firehose of content" nature of information, recognising that in any given time period, you only have so much personal bandwidth to dedicate.

With the federated model, content federating is itself subject to assessment, and is effectively re-vetted. Note that different communities might favour different content: cooking, kittens, Kabbalah, canoodling, cypherpunk, core meltdowns, classic cars, concerthalls. Vetted / re-vetted streams themselves might be of interest.

Both community- and time-based elements of this could get interesting.
I'm a huge fan of no downvote button, so much so in fact that I don't think users of any karma level should be able to do it.

Why concentrate this power into the hands of a privileged few? It's a representative system where we vote certain users into high karma, but they needn't return any favors and can subsequently downvote things that are otherwise suitable for the platform. Privilege can, and will, be abused in full.
Wikipedia cites a Malta Today article from 2019.

> [Binance established their headquarters in Malta] soon after the Maltese government passed laws that provided a regulatory framework for businesses operating in the Cryptocurrency and Blockchain industry. The regulation officially passed into a law on July 4th 2018. Malta remains the only country in the world to officially pass such laws.

The Coindesk article from 2020 states:

> Until February [of 2020], Binance was considered to be based in Malta. That changed when the island European nation announced that, no, Binance is not under its jurisdiction. Since then Binance has not said just where, exactly, it is now headquartered.

And quotes CZ:

> “Well, I think what this is is the beauty of the blockchain, right, so you don’t have to … like where’s the Bitcoin office, because Bitcoin doesn’t have an office.” [1]

The Wikipedia article is stale, and incorrect on the basis of the subsequent statements from executives involved.

The beauty of blockchain indeed.

[1] https://www.coindesk.com/binance-doesnt-have-a-headquarters-...
Exactly. It's not actually hard once it clicks, but I think a certain subset of newcomers spend lots of time being frustrated with the fact that their understanding doesn't seem to work, when they could just be given the key bits of information and be able to move forward with things making sense. That was the motive of this post :)
It's a blog that focuses on building rich, interactive, CSS heavy websites. I don't think spartan design would really speak well for the purpose of the blog.
Brian Armstrong on History of Coinbase
Ok no-coiner.
The reasoning behind using UTF-16/UCS-2 is that then you can plug your ears and treat 1 char == 1 user-visible glyph on the screen, so programmers that acted as if ASCII was the only encoding in existence could continue treating strings in the same way (using their length to calculate their user-visible length, indexing directly on specific characters to change them, etc).

All of those practices are immediately wrong once UTF-32 came in existence and UTF-16 became a variable length encoding. But even if that hadn't happened, what you want to be operating on is not characters, but grapheme clusters, which are equivalent to a vector of chars. Otherwise you won't handle the distinction between ë and ë or emojis correctly.
Also : marketing / discoverability
I had the same question or concern. I also realized too late that 0.12 is a bigger one than first thought. I was not severely impacted in the end, but boy it was a long time that I didn't experience such a tough upgrade. Happy to know that the hardest is behind and looking forward to try 0.15. Thanks
Ethereum Name Service: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly
https://www.advratings.com/banking/worlds-top-banks-by-marke... : it's in the top 10-20.

Does anyone know what the value of assets under management by Coinbase is?
Many years ago, my employer was transitioning ERP systems from...something CA-owned whose name escapes me and I'd probably have pretty awful memories dredged up if I actually went looking for it.

Anyway, we were lucky enough to have a very talented intern who was assigned the task of understanding the database schema behind the CA product in order to migrate our data to the new system.

It was...horrific. Absolute nightmare of spaghetti. I'd like to say I've seen worse, but I've never seen anything even in the same ballpark.

I think we finally gave up after weeks of digging into it and just started over with a mostly clean slate.
The simple rule running your java program is a NAND-gate.
I don't know what your argument actually is, or what it has to do with what I said. You're just complaining under my comment because you objected to the word interesting.
A Look at the CashFusion Protocol
Imgur is a great example of this at work.
> Tax carbon at whatever level makes sense and Bitcoin will adjust.

> The externality is at the power plant, not the use. Banning a use is like basing your server's security on client-side Javascript.

How would that work? Applying the same carbon tax on farming as on bitcoin? You always need to differentiate on use. Otherwise we could also just have a single income tax and be done with it. However taxing food as much as a Ferrari doesn't really make sense.
I think a critical missing context of reposting an old 2009 article is that a newer post in 2011 makes downvotes free instead of costing reputation:

>Jeff Atwood announced change of policy -- "Downvotes on questions no longer cost the casting user 1 reputation, so they are effectively “free”. [...] So, it’s imperative the question list have a high signal-to-noise ratio, and removing the penalty for those users who do take the time to read a question and later find it to be useless so they can down-vote is conducive to that." -- excerpt from : https://stackoverflow.blog/2011/06/13/optimizing-for-pearls-...

Why? He saw that users were too hesitant in downvoting which allowed bad content to grow and further degraded the site. Changing the downvoting mechanics fixed that.

(I don't know if there's been an update since 2011 to the downvoting system and incentives.)
Civil forfeiture where govt sues "property" to seize it so they don't have to have a trial for the person owning said property is a shady dark pattern that shouldn't be cited as an ethical approach at all. Just my opinion.
A pragmatic approach, which I value as a team member!

Currently my small team is using “user stories” for deliverable value and tasks as default for everything else.

Sometimes there are longer descriptions as the why is important to add (for future team members and myself) to “user stories”.
Yes - and you've just proven the folly of this entire exercise -> those algorithms have nothing to do with AI!

If the government believes that credit risk systems cannot use 'race' as a factor, then they ought to reaffirm that.

They shouldn't be restricting broad use of a technology.
wow, talk about a "numbers game" strategy!
Yeah, I saw that figure and thought "damn, that's high".

I'm not sure how many hits per day that works out as, but currently I have a server that is 5 euros per month handling 20k hits per day (static and dynamic content on an old dedicated C1 Scaleway). Another server I run for a gaming community costs $1 per month.

> I have no idea what or how much stuff his backend is doing, and I know serverless is an added and often worthwhile expense

I keep looking at 'serverless' (+) - but it just seems like a way to sell me less for more. The benefit I get currently from a cloud solution is location (spin up an instance close to where the traffic is coming from), maintenance (I move around a lot) and network (dedicated high speed internet that cannot be easily DDoS'd).

(+) When I first heard about serverless, I really hoped it was a decentralized content hosting network - a bit like how something like PeerTube can benefit from having multiple users at a time. A person can dream!
More humility, please.

They found a way it works for their team and claim that they solved software development. Well on their team page they have 9 super experienced members backed by big investors.

Get a product where you have 3 teams with 30 developers (probably 20 juniors and 10mid/senior), 15 testers and and 20 business analysts/customer people, maybe 2 or 3 product owners to keep it somewhat tidy. Keep it lean because you have pressure from above to cut spending as much as you can, because there are no angel investors above you dropping helicopter money. Have an approach that will work in that environment. Then take it and implement in 2 more companies with the same result, then you can write what is and what is not obsolete in software development.
Yeah, I wonder if this will become a trend. I always thought the underwriting agency in an IPO was a form institutional gate keeping / toll booth on the road to going public.
Reminds me of this article I read: http://www.newnownext.com/ive-contracted-my-third-gastrointe...
Selling 15402 Pixels as NFT
I find it really hard to believe this app is making 5m from ads and uninformed people buying it.
From our experience. 0.11 -> 0.12: We're not attempting. We're in the process of changing out config management anyway and we're unhappy with a bunch of decisions in that terraform stack, so it's a good point to get rid of it.

0.12 -> 0.13: Well, we had to add what feels like a million required-provider-blocks and then some more. And sometimes it was tricky to pinpoint the module pulling in a default provider and crashing - `terraform providers` and `terraform graph` help there. The graph is easy to grep through to find the resources and modules pulling in wrong providers. And in the beginning the error message we got when we had to run 'terraform state upgrade-providers' was .. obscure. In newer versions, that message is much better.

0.13 -> 0.14 just happened and now the lock files are slowly piling in on demand.
Man I love Planetes, such a good series! They put some effort into keeping it realistic too: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planetes#Realism
Your definition of efficient is anything but?
I love articles like this. I imagine this is the kind of stuff you learn if you study CS or Software Engineering in college. Maybe when I retire I will go and get a CS degree so I can learn all the things I should have learned before I began working professionally as a programmer 25 years ago.
It's not "creepy". This is misleading.

It'll look as normal as a car or a mechanical digger or a drone or a camera.

No one is going to see it and think creepy. Any other 'emotions' will normalise quickly to neutral.
Well yea, i wasn't saying `[char]` _is_ a `str`, rather i was positing that the GP comment was asking why it's a `str` than some hypothetical `[unsized_char]`.

I think `char` _would_ work, if it was similarly unsized like a single piece of `str`. The Problem is .. as i see it, that `[unsized_char]` seems odd.
Not to forget Linda, named by a scientist nowadays more interested in bewailing the decline of traditional values than in celebrating it.