skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This was kind of my question too. I am still yet to properly understand what the point in owning an NFT tied to a piece of digital art is.

Traditionally owning art is meaningful because you get to display it in your home/office etc. The artwork is intrinsically valuable as a unique material object. Digital art, on the other hand, can be duplicated easily so there is nothing you can point to and say "this is the original".

I don't see how that is synonymous with owning traditional art, you don't have anything unique since everyone can "own" Charlie bit my finger as much as the NFT owner owns it. We can watch the video whenever we want, even if it's taken down off of the official YT channel, there are thousands of copies everywhere. So unless you own the rights to the video and royalties or whatever then all you have is an NFT token that symbolizes something important to whoever thinks it's important (much like currency).

Seems to me that an NFT itself is more like a vanity plate on a car than anything else, basically bragging rights that you can sell on if anyone else sees value in bragging. I suppose the gamble is that NFTs will continue to mean something to someone but it does seem to me to be a long bet that people with piles of cash are hedging or simply don't mind paying $$$s for a fashion statement.
They already have. Uber is down 80% passenger drivers. They left because of Covid, many switched to UberEats and have not come back. The O’Hare waiting lot is empty even on busy days.
‘If a lion could speak, we could not understand him’.

- Wittgenstein

So even things we understand as fundamental truths of the universe are so deeply rooted in human experience that it's possible another living entity could be so different than ourselves that the capacity to sympathize with one another about certain things may simply not exist. Would a lion understand a corsage? Would an alien know what 12 x 12 means? The universe is just one hella big ¯\_( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)_/¯
I didn't realize that this was Coq, that makes more sense.

Still, if this is meant to be used by C coders it might be worth stooping to our level, many of us won't be comfortable with this mathematical notation. I know I'm not, and I know I'm not the most mathematically illiterate in general.
> Honestly kind of a depressing thing to read on "Hacker News"

Is it? For many of us, our computers are tools we use to get jobs done, so stability and predictability in function are far more valuable than something that looks pretty. Ask a carpenter if he wants glitter on their hammer, or a plumber if they need tinsel on their monkey wrench (oh and also the nut screws the opposite direction because some programmer with UX designer aspirations thought that might be neat two decades ago).
It Turns Out, All Those 'Woke' White Allies Were Lying
Do you have a source for that?

The official investigation concluded it was a mistake by poorly trained soldiers who thought they were downing a military An-26 plane.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaysia_Airlines_Flight_17
I like that he keeps it open-minded, but I've thought a lot about this and to me the case for numbers being inevitable is decisively yes. Every adaptable system evolves to adapt to a changing environment by detecting "modes" (categories) and adapting to each mode. Then we start noticing categories come in instances. There's a tree, there are more trees. So now it's useful to count them... Then it's useful to have fractions. And measurements (like weight and length). Basic operations like + - emerge, and with that multiplication. And with that division... and so on.

I think the fundamental properties of math are one of those things that will keep emerging for every thinking system. Not because numbers are fundamental to the universe. Rather they're fundamental aspect of intelligently adapting to (i.e. thinking about and making predictions about) the universe.
My wife ordered an electric bike about a year ago from Strom/Stroem and it finally showed up a couple of weeks ago. I did the "final assembly", which was attaching the handlebars and front wheel. The hardest part was putting a plastic cover over the 5 cables on the downtime. That took two people, one to hold the cables while the other snapped the cover in place.

The bike was designed in Denmark but the box came from Thailand. I would guess that ocean shipping for Peloton from China to Los Angeles or Long Beach and then truck or rail from there to Portland is slightly cheaper than just truck or rail from Ohio but probably not enough to matter.

I'd never tried an electric bike before. I can see why people use them instead of cars. It's pretty awesome.
At the end of the day doesnt the trust still fall back to the author? If you are getting 1/1 of a digital autograph or something, you are trusting the author to later not make more autographs.

Even if the institutions that authenticate the autographs go away, their record of the work they did so far is printed into the permanent record, no?
I found some reasons for the inaccuracy of setTimeout:

From https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/WindowOrWor...

- Nested timeouts

> As specified in the HTML standard, browsers will enforce a minimum timeout of 4 milliseconds once a nested call to setTimeout has been scheduled 5 times.

- Timeouts in inactive tabs

> To reduce the load (and associated battery usage) from background tabs, browsers will enforce a minimum timeout delay in inactive tabs. It may also be waived if a page is playing sound using a Web Audio API AudioContext.

> The specifics of this are browser-dependent.

- Throttling of tracking scripts

> Firefox enforces additional throttling for scripts that it recognises as tracking scripts. When running in the foreground, the throttling minimum delay is still 4ms. In background tabs, however, the throttling minimum delay is 10,000 ms, or 10 seconds..

- Late timeouts

> The timeout can also fire later than expected if the page (or the OS/browser) is busy with other tasks.

- Deferral of timeouts during pageload

> Firefox will defer firing setTimeout() timers while the current tab is loading.
My question is: How has the best company in the world at adtech failed so hard on ads that content creators need to do this, and what implications does that failure raise.
Woah. That one felt like reading Sun Tzu for chess! Know of any more basic theory like this ?
But I also wouldn't mind if future archaeologists entombed me in a pyramid, used my body as a comedic prop, burnt me for fuel, etc.

At some point after death we should acknowledge we no longer have moral claims on the world.
Huh. There's something to this.

I've often wondered why certain people feel so attached to static typing when in my experience it's rarely the primary source of bugs in any of the codebases I work with.

But it's true, I do generally feel like a codebase that's so complex or fractured that no one can understand any sizable chunk of it is just already going to be a disaster regardless of what kind of typing it uses. I don't hate microservices, they're often the right decision, but I feel they're almost always more complicated than a monolith would be. And I do regularly end up just reading implementation code, even in 3rd-party libraries that I use. In fact in some libraries, sometimes reading the source is quicker and more reliable than trying to find the relevant documentation.

I wouldn't extrapolate too much based on that, but it's interesting to hear someone make those connections.
You've conflated might with right, I think. It's pretty clear the comment you're replying to was not judging this on financial terms.
I seriously doubt that the high-end NFT economy is sustainable in the long term. The people who are buying these are just burning money.
I don't get it. I just don't understand. One, why did anyone want to buy this meaningless video? Two, why did it need to be done via NFT, and finally why for such a large sum of money?

Is this a form of money laundering? I am so confused, no part of this makes any sense to me at all.
An NFT is essentially a trading card for the thing that it's attached to. Just like you don't "own" Babe Ruth in any meaningful sense by owning a Babe Ruth trading card, you don't "own" the artwork associated with an NFT by owning the NFT itself. The exception is if there's some arrangement external to the NFT that links ownership of the NFT to ownership of the thing.
From that point of view the Ryanair jet wasn't denied the option to land so that Protasevich could be arrested so it suffered no threat.

See the ridiculousness of that argument?

What actually happened is that both planes were coerced under the threat of death.
Graph Theory and Sex [pdf]
> Hopefully this will become a trend and the cheapest countries will attract better talent.

Hrm, I disagree. I think the most beneficial countries will attract better talent. Having a low tax bill doesn't mean much if I need to pay for things privately.

I also personally emigrated from the US owing to the fact that healthcare there is immoral and it felt like (about a decade ago when I left) the country was on the path to major unrest. I've been quite happy up here in Canada where I pay more taxes but get to work with people who aren't burdened down by the stress of untreated health issues.
well, content creators doesn't have to pay the infrastructure/storage cost either.
> Why would it be different on iOS?

Facebook hasn't taken out any full page ads in the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, and probably others about Google Android not allowing them to track you without asking first. Clearly the circumstances are different.
It totally disagree. I think it is quite equivalent. The difference is that we don't have a centralized authority to recognize valid NFTs, as we do for deeds. But if we did have a central authority, like perhaps the artist responsible for the work protected by the NFT, and if the artist made it clear and public that only the NFTs she recognizes could be considered valid proof of ownership of her works, then indeed an NFT would function like a deed.
> All the norms around burial culture are contrivances made up by humans and have little basis in the natural world. That the dead even deserve respect is similarly made-up.

Not sure elephants, among other species, would agree.
No need for Wittgenstein.

Fish have 0 legs. So how many legs do N fish have? N*0 = 0.

Now division by zero, that is Devil's idea.
Last year I remember something similar happening but it was 100% confirmed to only apply to folks who are ineligible to monetize due to not having enough views or subscribers to be in the partnership program so in that case you were making $0 anyways.

But it's not clear if this new TOS change affects everyone or only folks not eligible for their partnership program.

For example if you're a channel creator who could monetize but chooses to hit no, will YouTube be able to run ads on your videos now? It sounds like a yes based on the TOS wording since it doesn't explicitly mention a type of creator and includes "your" (which is a blanket statement to include everyone).

This sounds like it'll affect me directly. I have 12k subs and I've chosen not to run ads on any of my videos because I'd rather someone watch my videos without interrupt even if that means losing out on ad revenue. But moving forward it sounds like I'll enable ads on my videos because if YouTube is going to potentially run ads on them them I might as well benefit from it too.

As someone most likely affected by this I'm not really upset at YouTube over it. Hosting and streaming video isn't cheap. Sure I'd prefer not to have ads forced upon watchers of my content but at the same time I can't blame Google for wanting to make money off a platform we're all benefiting from. I've learned so much over the years from various YouTube videos and that mostly comes down to having easy access to find high quality videos.

How upset would you be if ads started to appear on a channel that never ran ads? Would you stop watching videos on that channel or do you just run ad blocker anyways?
I worked at a large billion dollar company in the Bay Area (who is in the health space) and they religiously followed Clean Code. Their main architect was such a zealot for it.
My problem is not with the book and author itself but the seniority that peddles this as some gospel to the more junior engineers.
Clean code is not end all be all. Be your own person and develop WHAT IS RIGHT FOR YOUR ORG not peddle some book as gospel

So glad I work at a company now where we actually THINK on the right abstractions now and not peddle some book
Off topic but is connecting to Mongo on every API hit best practice? I abstract my connection to a module and keep that open for the life of the application.
Could be money laundering related too. Buy NFTs for small sums with clean crypto, sell it to your dirty wallet for inflated sums. In order for something like that to work there needs to be plausible deniability so they also buy NFTs with clean wallets which would explain the volume. Plus the legitimate crypto speculators see these crazy numbers and jump aboard too.
Does Google currently provide the same abilities to block tracking as Apple?
That’s a really comprehensive answer, thank you! I don’t have a particular focus, just wondering what the trade offs are.
Facebook to Bring Back Manhattan Office Workers Starting in July
In that case sure, you could do it, just as you could sell someone a deed to a rock you picked up off the street.
Thanks for reporting this. This is definitely not the expected behavior. Would love to figure out what was going wrong.

matt [at] fig.io
Yes. For the life of me I don't know why we passed Q's test in TNG.

Also as a child you are mindful after you break something - as an adult you let others do the breaking for you so you don't have to see it. Let it be someone's job to kill or dig the earth and extract minerals or cut down trees or pollute the sky - then support them instead of having mommy yell and berate them.
Are there laws to prevent owners of culturally significant artworks, e.g. van Gogh and da Vinci paitnings, from being destroyed, and from being shipped to countries that do not have regulations against them being destroyed? It seems the free market is moving in the direction of valuing destruction of art more than the art itself. In the absence of regulations, it would be a matter of time until some investor buys up a bunch of masterpieces, turn them into NFTs, destroys them, and ends up doubling their money in the process.
$700M for $70M? I'd say it's still a very jaw dropping deal
There are some such values, but I recognize their fragility in the face of actual human behavior.

And indeed, I think a lot of aspects of culture are dumb and that society would be better off without. It would be better if the world returned to the basics instead of endlessly wrapping itself around an axle of contrivances.
I have the similar wish and opinion as Ben Thompson. ( But somehow unpopular on HN )

>And, for what it’s worth, continue controlling games: I do think the App Store is a safer model, particularly for kids, and the fact of the matter is that consoles have the same rules.

Move Games away from App Store to Game Store. Keep those 30% cut. This way Apple have just protected ~90% of their App Store revenue. Like Ben have said, this is similar to console.

>Let developers own their apps, including telling users about their websites, and let creatives build relationships with their fans instead of intermediating everything.

Not just "creatives", but business to built relationship with their customers. Most people will still definitely sign up through Apple ID simply due to protection and simplicity. Collect flat 10% commission on digital goods with no exemption.

And App Store should approve apps as long as they are legal, fit the quality of apps in both UI and security requirement. Not because of its political speeches.

Finally Subscription Scams. Something needs to be done. I have a few solutions in my head but all of them have major drawbacks.
i don't have this issue! awesome synth! and i really like the tracker-style keys ;D
This is a great comment, thanks for adding to the conversation.

This further gives proof that it is technically feasible for Spotify and Apple Music to be able to import/export playlists across both their services. Looking forward to seeing it happen in reality.
> "It is often the contradictions in an individual’s character that give it distinction; in the case of Orwell, these were more marked and more numerous than in most, but it is not clear whether he was even aware of them."

I gave up right there, this was so grossly condescending to its subject. Orwell was not aware of his own contradictions? Has the author ever actually read any Orwell?
> If people are still using Facebook, today, knowing all that has happened, the odds are most people will continue using it though one can dream. I would honestly expect 90%+ of Facebook users to sideload if Facebook required it.

Why sideload when you can simply open it up in any mobile browser?
I remember some of the people who worked hard designing the hardware and software that went into feature phones being outraged, perhaps in a similar way, by the stupid amounts of money people were spending on ringtones at that time (about 20 years ago).
40h/week, now and then, 10hr/quarter. It depends on person
Google play store is less restrictive than Apple’s.

With that said, I find the argument weak - it’s hard for me to believe that sideloading will be a big share of the market, as it hasn’t caught on in areas where a google is restrictive (e.g. adult content).
The price is not bad or at least not as bad as I had feared. It's a bit disappointing that it's 16:9 instead of 16:10 though. Being a device aimed at monitor nerds, which would include a high number of programmers, you'd think that Dasung would've used the latter.
Yes, I think it would be worse if my boss said I must have sex with them in order to keep my job than if they asked me to do their laundry.

Both are bad, but I disagree with your moral intuition - and suspect most people would as well.

The key moral fact here is more than just "it's not what you signed up for"
TLDR:

* Offices in Manhattan will open July 12 at 25% capacity

* Self-serve salad bars and fresh cookie platters will be swapped with pre-packaged individualized meals.
Is NFT an eternal copyright now? An NFT is basically a deed of ownership, like buying up property.

Such products will never see the public domain, as they are owned forever. I wonder if the major publishing companies are eyeing these up
How to rewrite a JavaScript library that runs on billions of devices per day
Yeah this project totally completely baffled me. "Autocomplete for the Terminal". What?? Bash has had fully programmable auto-completion for over 20 years [1] -- and that's just one comparitively bare-bones shell, out of dozens that are all free forever and not spyware.

Watching their demo didn't help either. At most the behavior seems an incremental improvement over what Bash ships with in most distros, and it's not even clearly better than that (IMO worse, I prefer the trailing slash or color-coding that Bash uses to distinguish file/dir properties vs icons). Joke: Is the "perceived need" really just because macOS's default Bash distro has these features disabled?

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bash_(Unix_shell)#cite_note-60
It doesn't happen with all treadmills, it happens on treadmills without a guard. You pointing to other flawed designs doesn't make Peloton's design less flawed.
That would be pretty stupid (or at least risky) on YouTube's part.

Content creators earn much more money from product placements and ads within their videos than they do from the ad share that YouTube pays out. With a medium-sized German YouTuber, you easily pay 50,000 euros for a 30-second review of the product. And in the video, he talks about several products. To earn 100,000 euros just from views, the video must be clicked millions of times.

Content creators would immediately look for or build another platform if their most important source of revenue was blocked.
The real market would be owning early works by an unknown, who later becomes known.

That will evolve into the patron system again, where the owner of early works becomes a hype machine to drum up their artists clout, and then offloads their early work.
Technology like NFTs being promoted in the way that they have been impacts the rest of the market. Not only do they manipulate relative values of legitimate applications of technology, they make people distrust the entire tech sector once the hype cycle dies down.

Look at blockchain today versus 4-5 years ago. There might actually be some legitimate uses for the technology, but that market has been soiled by the scammers and their ICOs.

At least that's where my frustration comes from.
Warping / Dommain Distortion
Or really trusting anyone who downloaded it and reposted it, etc. This is not about scarcity but about a certificate of authenticity that you can show around. The actual good is worthless, the certificate is what is hard to forge.
I think the purpose of NFTs doesn’t make sense today but maybe the future of the internet are browser implementations by Google and Apple that check ownership of assets embedded in HTML and fail to display them until you pay a royalty fee?

I guess Firefox and Chromium wouldn’t need to go along unless someone lobbied Congress to change the laws.

I don’t know how similar this would be to DRM, which seems to have failed to stop piracy.
Past performance is no guarantee of future results
If the 6th extinction we are in takes humans with it, I doubt that new intelligent species that pop up as a result of evolution on earth will behave any differently. One powerful difference that could change that: our fossil records. We can look to dinosaurs and see that with a little bit of bad luck we could be wiped out, but it's not a strong enough message. Our remains will show future species that collectively, individuals have the power to completely destroy the earth, and that might be a strong enough lesson to prevent this from happening again.
I'm not saying I always agree with the results of democracy, merely that I am happy, in this case, that most people reject your line of thought.
> That can be seen as much as a downside as an upside, because it makes life a lot easier for hardware manufacturers to ship more binary blobs

Which is essentially the point of this approach for Google, to exert greater control.
Now you've made me wonder why Dolphin can't store textures and all GPU data in the same form in memory as the Gamecube -- and do any translation on-the-fly in shaders.
Right - seeing so much money thrown around with so little backing/reason/substance doesn't really motivate you to go back to your life and put in a full workweek in exchange for whatever your salary is.
I am more bewildered as I try to figure out where the value is coming from. An NFT as far as I can tell is just saying 'yes I own this thing'. But the original creator still owns everything really relevant about that thing anyway. What are they buying? Are there any relevant resources out there that lay out where the value is derived?
Well, the choice of location may offer some legal preference in case of future faults. I'm aware that Ohio has a safe harbour law to protect companies against data breach if they comply with certain criteria they outline. So may well be other such safe harbour legislation that would be favourable for liability mitigation and with that, insurance liability reduction.

So may well be many nuances at play in this selection, or might even be down to some CEO living nearby and just wants to pop a made local/USA sticker on the product.

Time will tell.
Seriously, this device is only a few years old and it runs like a 2013 windows netbook. Apps crash all the time, bluetooth glitches, unresponsive UI, etc.
> I've implemented the board game Go in Python, Rust, and Julia and Julia

Oof. I reread this several times consecutively as "I've implemented the board game in Go, Python, Rust ...".