skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Yes, because right now they say one thing but do the other.

Would your rather they deceive than saying nothing?
Other things going on in the ecosystem right now that might be related, outside of the rumor that some big SEC charges are about to be announced (haven't seen anything myself):

BTC hash rate dropping due to Chinese power outages/blackouts due to some safety inspections (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26849652)

Can't see any new news related to BTC related SEC charges: (https://www.google.com/search?q=SEC+charges+bitcoin&source=l...)

Just some background for anyone who cares
It’s this blockchain?
I don't know why - but this comment makes me laugh
That's not how it works. In the event of a hard-fork, when the two forks adopt different rules about what blocks are valid, the actual users of BTC still decide which rules to follow. If a miner produces blocks that are invalid according to the rules that are adopted, the blocks that it produces are just disregarded. Thus, the hash rate competition between miners is only within each fork.

If you are talking about denial-of-service by producing empty blocks or blocks that exclude certain addresses, that's another matter...
Abusing the power of their job to retaliate against specific parties? Yes it sounds like pretty clear-cut corruption.
Plus, the model of BTC as “digital gold” is pretty resilient to 51% attacks: if you don’t touch your coins, no one can take them away from you. (A 51% attack can’t reassign coins.)

Of course, the price of BTC might tank in response to the news of a successful 51% attack, but it’ll probably bounce back just like every other event in BTC history.
Real estate agents shouldn’t be permitted to own anything other than a primary residence in any region they are licensed in. Or they should be required to use another agent that they have no other relationship with to transact on properties they do own.
Is there a list of aborted technologies and technologies that died in childbirth?

Like, say, electric cars in 1900-1915?
It technically exists in a form where almost nobody will ever realize it exists, let alone be able to use it.
One of the best websites on the internet.
I’m not sure I get it. Only one person can own a Bitcoin at a time.

So some people of reinvented fractional reserve banking. But now with the problem that it’s unregulated, unbackstopped by a lender of last resort and ultimately through rehypothecation you’ve virtually eliminated any advantage gained by using blockchain technology.
well the need for this has mostly gone away due to the 2017 TCJA.

The short version is you can't do this because as a US (assuming?) individual you are subject to worldwide taxation (unlike the rest of the world (well except Eritrea)).

But the wikipedia article on the double Irish is actually pretty interesting if you are interested in such things and lays out the steps:

1) A U.S. corporate (CORP) develops new software in the U.S. costing $1 million to build;

2) CORP sells it to its wholly owned Bermuda company (BER1) for $1 million (at cost, ideally);

3) BER1 revalues it to $1 billion (as an intangible asset under GAAP), and books gain in Bermuda (tax-free);

4) An Irish subsidiary, IRL1, purchases this intangible asset from BER1, for $1 billion;

5) Under the CAIA rules, IRL1 can write-off the $1 billion paid for this group intangible asset against Irish tax;

6) Additionally, BER1 gives IRL1 a $1 billion 10-year inter-group loan to buy the intangible asset, at an interest rate of circa 7%;

7) Over the next 10 years IRL1 claims tax relief on both the $1 billion purchase (under CAIA), and the inter-group loan interest;

8) During the 10 years, IRL1 charges out this asset to end-customers globally (as per step v. in the Double Irish), accumulating profits;

9) During the 10 years, CORP in line with its product cycle, has created new software and repeated step i. to iii. above;

10) At the end of the 10 years, IRL1 has shielded $1.7 billion of Irish profits against Irish tax;

11) At the end of the 10 years, BER1, who received the $1 billion purchase price, and $0.7 billion in loan interest, has paid no tax;

12) At the end of the 10 years, IRL1, repeats steps iv. to ix. above, and buys a new intangible asset from BER1 for $1 billion.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_Irish_arrangement
Men With Guns control land, Men With Guns control power. Men With Guns is not Bitcoin. Men With Guns is govt.

Bitcoin is a fiat leech with no real power.
2002 was the last year Germany imported more power than it exported:

https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/153533/umfrag...
Survivor Bias.

If some other random Encyclopedia had survived and not Wikipedia, you'd be asking "Why did <other random Encyclopedia> succeed while other encyclopedias failed?"

There's nothing really special about Wikipedia except that it survived while other websites didn't. There's only "room" for one or two encyclopedias on the Web, it's very possible that some other encyclopedia is destined to replace Wikipedia in the future, just like FaceBook replaced MySpace.
I was leading a team of thirty five people in the US and India and working weekends and holidays powering through a death march of one terrible release after another. I got a lot of accolades for work; called out at town halls and even a hand written letter from our CTO thanking me for everything I'd done.

Things were slowly improving as we collected metrics to improve poor code quality and shoddy releases that were killing us all. (This predates SRE/devops by a decade.) The AD teams had no choice but to add some quality control but still things weren't perfect.

At the end of our third year of this five year project the project manager who worked with me on one portion of what we did was promoted to executive director but I was not.

Within a few days of learning I was passed over for promotion I also accidentally discovered my grandfather had died of cancer. I didn't even know he was sick! No one in the family told me. I just found out about the funeral when someone asked me if I planned to attend.

While at the funeral I made plans to have dinner with my younger sister and to go to Las Vegas with my grandmother. Soon after my sister was dead, killed in the line of duty as a police officer. A month later my grandmother was dead from open heart surgery.

The whole time this was happening people were coming up to me at work asking how did that guy get promoted instead of you? How, indeed. The challenge for me was staying motivated and putting on a happy face for employees and not quitting. Frankly if I'd been able to I would have.

The part that makes me laugh now is at the time we still did exceeds, meets, needs improvement stack ranking. My boss told me if he had made me exceeds I would have gotten the promotion but he couldn't because of politics: the guy who sponsored the fellow who did get promoted managed to get my ranking knocked down so I wasn't competing with his fellow for ED. To top it off my mentor dropped me: he said if I was no longer an exceeds it was a waste of his time.

Despite falling into a black pit of depression I powered through the motions of being a people manager but frankly I couldn't take any part of managing careers of others any more when I knew the system was so broken and I had wasted years away from family and friends. My solution was to go back to being a hands on technical person: I transfered to our internal IT group and started over. I'm back to leading teams and getting kudos from the top of the house but still if I'm honest I feel like I failed my biggest challenge by choosing to just move on. On the other hand I'm certainly far happier and no longer ignoring family and friends to work 80-100 hour weeks. On balance that's probably for the best.
That's right, but I think the OP was asking about differences in BTC from Gold as Ponzi schemes. I don't think it was "what makes Gold valuable"? I am just saying you can't use the BTC for anything but the scheme if it was a Ponzi scheme.

Just to put some additional data to this:

Jewellery: 92,947 tonnes, 47.0%

Private investment: 42,619 tonnes, 21.6%

Official Holdings: 33,919 tonnes, 17.2%

Other: 28,090 tonnes, 14.2%

Below ground reserves: 54,000 tonnes

To answer that question, I would suggest that gold is valuable because it has uses. BTC as a payment instrument is useful, but how useful?
How to Make Your Rental Feel Like Home?
Is bitcoin really decentralized if mining and nodes are centralized?
So cBTC simply isn’t Bitcoin. It a double spend by design. So the whole fixed supply goes out the window when depositories start extending credit.
I have never run out of breath on a rowing machine - not even close. It seems like a good exercise, don't get me wrong, but I can row and (talk, sing or whistle) at the same time with no problem. I set the "fan" on the highest level and row for 30 minutes at a time. I could row harder but I fear breaking the bicycle chain at the core of the machine. I could row longer but it really is boring.

But I have never met anyone else who rows like I do. The rowing machine quickly exhausts some individuals whom appear to be in outstanding health. I always wrote it off to their being out of shape, reformed smokers, recovery from illness, etc. But if you're normal then I may be somewhat unusual in my cardiovascular capacity.
You’re getting downvotes, but I think (correct me if I’m wrong) you meant something like the hash difficulty will adjust down if this is an extended downtime. So we would have fewer miners, easier hash difficulty and the same block rate. This would indeed be better for the environment, at least for the short term. This and the reduction in centralization could be argued as being “good” for Bitcoin.
As someone who dabbles in Windows desktop development, I still don't know the best way to even make an MSI. Some of the tools from Microsoft are usable but they all seem to be obsolete.
> last i heard github was adding features to actually make it harder to submit drive by PRs because exhausted maintainers were finding themselves further exhausted by uninvested contributors making superfluous contributions.

Which features?
Yes, I got my most recent job without leetcode. Large tech company in SF. Interview was more about my past work experience and the tools required to do the job.
the consensus vote to activate sw2x on existing BTC network was an in-band mechanism, and set to some super impossible threshold like 95 or 99% to activate a protocol change.

this is a different situation, where an out of band entity can selectively shut off a significant fraction of hashpower, and unlike the weedy obscurity of an architectural spat between largely unknown (by the mainstream) such a move would (indeed, will) make major waves in mainstream Joe Pension Fund/ Number Go Up news, who will not be familiar with nor interested in the technical arguments for the fork that is being actively suppressed. there's no weeks-long debate window here.

the stakes are very different now than in the Jihan boogeyman days, you can't handwave away this critical risk to stability or spin it as technical trivia of no concern to non-specialists.
> First, overwork doesn't lead to more productivity for knowledge workers. You get to pay that piper one way or another in the end.

I have never seen any research showing net negative productivity for any job for under 60 hours a week of work. Overwork sucks but if you have evidence that it’s bad for productivity please cite it.
This does not imply that they are okay with Bitcoin's privacy guarantees because my post also does not imply that people are using Bitcoin as a currency. I think any discussion on crypto has to be conscientious of the fact that quite a large portion of the market cap is filled by speculative investors who are using the coin's price as a financial instrument, rather than as a payment provider.

This is even more obvious with Dogecoin which is accepted at maybe a handful of physical locations around the entire world - far less than Bitcoin, which is itself still pitiful in terms of commerce adoption rate.

The point of my original post was to say, in the event that the coin does start being used as an actual currency, and people do start having complaints about its technical limitations, that does not mean that it will automatically flop back down to worthlessness, because the procedure of hard forking would enable a development community to "fix" the coin and solve whatever problems arise. Bitcoin has been very useful this way as its blockchain was the first to reach an unmanageable size, leading to lots of innovative solutions to increase speed while decreasing disk space. Other coins, obviously wanting to compete with BTC, are incentivized to produce these solutions which can then be adopted by all other coins, improving the entire space at once. The open source nature (requirement, really) of crypto clients also means that nobody can hide their improvements behind an opaque backend - the code has to be visible to everyone, and everyone has to be able to fork it, meaning that everyone gets to use it.
I actually meant it as a joke. Because according to Bitcoin enthusiasts, any news is actually good for Bitcoin.
Thanks for the reply - I would like to be close to the tech side if I can but it's been tough so far without the initial experience. I'll keep revising and sending out my resume to the tech names as well to hopefully at least get an interview.
> if you don’t touch your coins, no one can take them away from you. (A 51% attack can’t reassign coins.)

it can't generate new unsigned transactions but it can roll back the network to a state when someone else owned those coins. from a practical perspective there is no difference, you no longer have those coins.
> Programs stay pretty self-contained to their part of the registry, program files, and the user profile data directory

There is nothing about MSI that enforces this. You can make an MSI that spews files all over, no problem.
Pentagon confirms video of unidentified aerial phenomena is real
Three users report they've experienced a bug (the fourth just says Signal won't start). We only know some symptoms of the bug, and almost nothing about its cause.

One user guesses at a db size limit, but there is strong evidence that's not the case - including users with much larger data stores and the fact that media is stored externally to the database (as we would expect).

Without more information, the problem could have little to do with Signal. It may be something funky about Android when it's low on space, or a million other possibilities.

Put on your IT hats - there is nothing of significance here; it's just an unconfirmed, undiagnosed bug reported by three users.
I address this and counter it approximately three paragraphs into my post.
I can relate a bit. I also wrote a book that quickly faded into obscurity. The biggest learning I had was I had no audience. I needed to build that first with blog posts or what not, THEN write the book.

I’m surprised that’s not covered here in this article
And if there is no delay, the animation takes longer than the task!
there's a limit to how far it can roll back the network, it probably wouldn't be able to roll back more than a few days..
Super-early employee here. Pay for your options your first day of employment. They should be inexpensive; and your employer should be willing to give you a signing bonus to cover it (after all, the money just goes right back to them). Then when you leave, you get to keep all vested shares with no tax consequence, no need to pony up any cash, and no need to sell right away. Worked out great for me.
The ‘greatest’ stock in world history paid its first dividend in 1780
I asked my Dad this once. He said it was because he liked doing it.
Nil-by-mouth foodie: A chef who will never eat again
Ultralight bosons shown not to impact two black holes
https://www.fitnesssuperstore.com/Woodway-Desmo-Evo-Treadmil...

There are many models of slatted treadmills and in my shopping I haven't seen one with a guard

It could be a coincidence, a lot of treadmills period don't have guards, but really I think the answer here is maybe making sure kids can't activate it

I was expecting the child standing on it to be the one hurt since at full tilt those could easily catapult a child with deadly force..
Isn't that a bit like evaluating the cost of coffee based on starbucks prices?

We also don't know how recent this story is. When I was a kid, in the days before gentrification and gourmet-everything, there was a doughnut shop nearby that was like $2 for a dozen. It was way cheaper than regular fast food. I remember thinking what a great discovery it was until I found I couldn't handle more than a couple of them before the sugar was too much for me.
Bringing Paintings to Life with EbSynth
Isn't every experiment temporary one off? Ethics are strict bc of the dark history of human experimentation.
Startup I work for was acquired within the past year; came through as a "key employee". Don't like the new environment. Huge management hierarchy and management culture, command/control, siloed decision making, and etc.

Unfortunately my reward, as such, is tied up in retention based compensation. Not phoning it in yet, but struggling to reach the 1 year cliff. Honestly coming around to the idea..
True but they are describing the two as related. I took it to mean they are able to avoid addressing a stream of half-baked feature requests precisely because they are not banking on an exponentially growing user base. If skipping or postponing a new feature causes them to miss a few users, so be it.
Omg 100x yes, the answering UI on modern phones is the pinnacle example of why flat-ui needs to die. It should be the easiest UI to create with only two freaking buttons but still everyone fails so miserably bad. Shape of buttons are identical, colors are very faded and the icons to indicate phone up or down have been flattened so much you can hardly even recognize any of them is a phone. Or even worse are those you need to pick up the button and drag it either left or right to answer, without indication which direction means what until you touch.

Not even Apple gets it right, half of the time the answer button is white and placed on the left side of the screen and half of the time it's green and placed on the right! How fucked up is that??! I thought i was going crazy by constantly imagining the button being on the other side last time i answered but it turned out it actually was!

https://6abc.com/technology/why-your-iphone-can-accept-or-de...
Thanks Randy!
Some people like spicy, some people hate spicy. Everybody reacts to spicy.
If you're actually interested in looking into this you're free to search and find multiple models powered and unpowered with similar designs: https://www.fitnesssuperstore.com/Woodway-Desmo-Evo-Treadmil...

I stand by saying having the machine powered near kids is already game over. They should maybe add a child-safe mode that requires an additional pin to activate, guards are a red herring here
> Danger is important for children.

This is very, very true. I didn't use safety gates on my carpeted stairs when my kids were babies, and they learned to navigate stairs almost as soon as they could walk. I let them use scissors when they were really little too, and by the age of three they were expert little paper crafters.

That said, I sure as shit wouldn't let them play around a running treadmill, even if I was in the room.
>the consensus vote to activate sw2x on existing BTC network was an in-band mechanism, and set to some super impossible threshold like 95 or 99% to activate a fork.

Source for this? I searched around and the target was 80%.
https://www.weusecoins.com/what-is-segwit2x/

> such a move would (indeed, will) make major waves in mainstream Joe Pension Fund/ Number Go Up news, who will not be familiar with nor interested in the technical arguments for the fork that is being actively suppressed. there's no weeks-long debate window here.

Fair point, given how the markets reacted to this drop in hashrate.
Bitcoin fixes this /s
Note the Netflix strategy only works for high profit per employee, highly scalable firms.
> doesn't this effectively mean China can force a 51% attack by just strongarming the pools that operate there?

Yes, in theory. There's a coordination problem to get all the pools to do what you want, but if they (or anyone) could pull that off, then yes.

So then what happens?

If a single entity controls >50% of the hash power of the network, they could start finding blocks with arbitrary (invalid) transactions and adding them to the chain. The transactions they'd be able to insert are called 'double-spends', which is that wallet A sends its balance to wallet B, and then in the next block sends the same balance (magicked into existence) to some third wallet C.

All this can happen. The way the network is supposed to work though, miners don't just commit new blocks and call it a day, the 'full nodes' have to accept the blocks. The miners are more or less offering up solved blocks to the full nodes for their acceptance.

As a full node it's trivial to take a look at this double-spend from A->C and say 'nope this doesn't look like a valid block to me, try again'. At this point if enough full nodes do this, the 51% of 'bad' miners are just wasting their time, the true hashrate of the network is now 49% of what it was a moment ago, and the remaining 'good' miners will continue to find blocks. Business as usual.

It's a much harder problem to control >51% full nodes, mostly because they're more geographically distributed. This is because they're pretty simple to set up at home and run, without worrying about up front cost of miners, electricity and noise and so on. A bitcoin full node can run on a raspi with a 1tb external hard drive, and a normal consumer internet connection.

Another interesting tidbit is that with control of 51% of the miners, this still only means a malicious actor finds a block first 51% of the time... to get the 6 blocks usually required for confirmation (in a row) is a ~3% chance. Not a perfect safeguard, but just some perspective on how hard it is to execute an attack like this.

The idea is that the miners are beholden to the full nodes, who are the actual actors in the distributed consensus system.

There's some other game theory around why one would want to do obvious double spends after having that much control (why not just sell the bitcoin and take profits?). But there are definitely reasons a state actor would want to try to destroy the network.
So far it has.