skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It’s already fixed to some extent. On Reddit, you make a new subreddit of your own. On GitHub, you fork. The problem is that some projects are too big to effectively fork (or forking would over leverage the community) or people are lazy and don’t want to do the forking themselves despite accurately identifying the presence of a problem.
different person, also have aphantasia. My dreams are completely devoid of sensory content except sometimes the entire dream is music.
国 U+56FD CONTAINERIZED PRODUCTION READY MATHEMATICAL XI BAR WITH SUBPRIME INDICATOR
Assassin’s Creed Unity: Ubisoft can’t help rebuild Notre-Dame cathedral
Proof of work has always had an economic flaw that you could theoretically temporarily rent enough mining power to perform double spends of more value than the cost of renting those devices.

But this attack has never been performed because the reality of all these cryptocurrencies is that the security depends only relatively weakly on proof of work. Instead it relies on trust between the main stakeholders: miners, big nodes and developers. This is just like any other human organisation. That trust is only reinforced by proof of work, making it easier for new parties to become trusted.
yes... I hated it when professors used them on the board because I don't know how to write them other than making a squiggly...
Wouldn’t it be a real person making the gesture and his face is deepfaked on?
Well, Cascade is the name of the particle, not the symbol... (and it would normally be upper-case, no?)

for non-physicists: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xi_baryon

Also, for this reason, surprised it's one of the more rarely used Greek symbols...
Market cap is not the right way to think about this.

It's a useful metric but it doesn't represent real fund flows
1634 Dodge: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulip_mania

And they weren't even goosing fake market cap bits at the time.

> A hint of bad news will empty store shelves of toilet paper. A chip shortage is in some loose way related to a turkey shortage.

Ever hear of actual breadlines?

This guy thought he was a chicken:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VtLL3LOi87I

I think you might as well daydream yourself into a reality where the sky isn't falling. ;)
What about when it's the Reddit or GitHub admins who judge you to be guilty of thoughtcrime?
Or more realistically, you get banned from Reddit and Github.
Are these very technical really?
We did in school, but the original equation x^2 + bx + c was rewritten as x^2 + bx + (b/2)^2 - (b/2)^2 + c, and now you see the binomial. Our teacher said it felt like pulling a rabbit out of the hat.
thet the funds buy the stocks...

the fund units/shares are simply a convienient wrapper
I use semi-colons in coversational writing.

Also, it so happens that I wear a fedora. It's not an affectation, it's just a felt hat. My natural scalp insulation started to fall out a decade or so ago, so I started wearing beanies. But now I feel much more at home under a fedora - apart from anything else, the hat works as a sort of miniature umbrella.
hot damn!

Please add the ability to scroll down the popped up suggestions with cursor keys!
The Five Biggest Product Design Challenges in Crypto
This is the right answer. Bond markets are WAY bigger than equities markets and these figures represent a small preference shift out of bonds and into equities.

If anything it tells me that these valuations could go a lot higher.

And ironically its self perpetuating because if it crashes, rates will just be further suppressed reinforcing the move.
Or SICP…
Australia is a highly compliant/obedient society. It’s also highly litigious, lots of fines for anything and anything. It’s the defamation capital of the world.

Yes this will be enforced, it’ll be enforced selectively against critics of the current government. There is a video of the announcement with the current PM grinning and smirking in the background like a little kid when this is discussed https://www.reddit.com/r/australia/comments/r3qh1m/the_way_s....

The current pm is coming under a lot of criticism recently as well as other mp’s. There’s an election coming up in May so this is convenient timing. Recently a popular YouTube comedian / journalist had the anti terror police let loose on him for criticising mp’s with accusations of corruption. https://www.michaelwest.com.au/tamed-estate-arrest-of-friend...

Australia has no bill of rights for its citizens and the current government seem extremely self serving for personal gain.

The new Amazon documentary Burning about the 2019 bushfires goes on bit of an attack of the current Australian PM.

Australia is still very much the “Lucky country” https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lucky_Country
Meh, if it does it’ll be really boring like Goldman Sachs developing a blockchain to handle institution level transactions on a distributed ledger.

The whole thing with cryptocurrencies is just people excited about money laundering rebranded as something cool. Take that away (as no serious national government would allow such a thing) and what you have is more or less indistinguishable from Visa.
What do you mean? It’s not like a deepfake is a model that produces a new video from scratch in a completely random setting.

It needs a base video to be modified. They need a video of a person talking to do the deepfake.
Isn't that just ignorant spelling? I don't think that's a grammmar error. But I see it all the time.
> for example when i use Coinbase Pro to place an offer to buy 1 Bitcoin for $55000, i’m acting as a market maker.

My understanding is different. When you place an order, you're absorbing liquidity from the marketplace. A market maker is the party that generates liquidity by fulfilling orders, not the party that destroys it by placing them.
Just install Dr. Racket and write #lang sicp at the top. What kind of resources to help you approach the text you’re looking for?
Lib. genesis clon-backup, nice to see it up and running.
Ironically, ConstitutionDAO's $PEOPLE token has soared in value and many folks made exits at 30x.
The modern definition of troll seems to be more closely related to one of the personalities that got its start at a particular notorious imageboard, who constantly posts flamebait and thrives off of pushing the limits of how much they can upset others. I haven’t seen the original more innocuous definition used in a long time.
> you are expecting a profit of $901

No, it would be stupid to "expect" a profit of $901 because there is no scenario in which you would gain $901. You would either have -$100 or +$100000 and never +$901 in your stated scenario.*

In your case since there is a 99% probability of -$100, my "expectation" would be -$100 and if "surprise" of $100000 happens that is "surprise", not part of the "expectation".

* I realize there is a term called "expectation value" and I hate that term with a passion because in any distribution that doesn't roughly resemble a bell curve it would be stupid to "expect" the mean value. Statistics like the mean are not a good way to establish a strategy for a game that you only get to play once.
PoW systems rely on the "phone a friend method" as well. When you download a Bitcoin client from a "friend", you are trusting them to honestly introduce you to the network. If you fall asleep for a period of years, you have to trust your friends to honestly inform you of all of the PoW forks and policy changes that have occurred over that interval. The only difference is that PoS blockchain clients must be bundled with a modestly-recent block hash along with the thousands of lines of code that you have no practical way to audit.

The problem eventually reduces to Ken Thompson's "Trusting Trust" [1] problem. There's no way to externally validate the honesty of any system (cryptocurrency, or otherwise).

[1] https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~rdriley/487/papers/Thompson_1984_Ref...
To know it was "intentionally misleading" you'd need to know their intentions, I don't see how you could do that. I don't see this as intentionally misleading, as you can probably guess, so I don't know why you would assume that whoever made this did.

I said here that the pre-1920 period, which is relatively flat (within a variation of around +/-0.5 deg C), represents years with normal temperatures:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29309923

I'd say anything outside of +/-1 deg C from that average would not be "normal", and would need need an explanation. I'm not an expert though, but eyeballing the data that looks reasonable to me. I have already said this though, so not quite sure why you're asking me again.

I also don't see this as misleading ("intentionally misleading communication") - are you saying there is not an "anomaly"? That there is no climate change? Or that any climate change is within normal variation, that is, not affected by industrial emissions?

The example you give of summer and winter having different temperatures is obviously not relevant to climate change as presented here. The "little ice age" has a scale and speed of change not comparable to what is presented here, as I've already mentioned.

Given all this I don't understand how you can think there is no anomaly. It is even less clear to me how you would conclude this was intentionally misleading when it seems totally reasonable to label this an anomaly based on the data and the science behind it, which you seem to be ignoring or disagreeing with.

I mean... they even have a chart of average temperatures going back to 1850, so it's not like they're hiding their data.

I guess you might be arguing that by calling it an "anomaly" they are making an assumption on the science that isn't justified by the chart. But the whole existence of this site is clearly premised on climate change being an issue, so the causality is the other way round. The site provides a simplified visualisation of data that shows what people have concluded through exhaustive scientific analysis.

The exhaustive scientific analysis provides the justification for the anomaly, this site shows this data in a way that's easy to digest. You shouldn't be looking at this data in isolation and saying there is man-made climate change, you should be looking at this site as a starting point to review more research and understand why this data that looks concerning is in actual fact really concerning.

If the scientific literature was in any was non-conclusive about whether there is genuine anthropogenic climate change, I'd have more sympathy to your point on whether using the word anomaly is appropriate or misleading. But you're not arguing the science, not even arguing the data, you're only arguing the word "anomaly", and for me that's such a long way from proving this to be propaganda that I don't feel you're arguing in good faith.

I am not at all concerned with the use of the word anomaly because I already am concerned about climate change. I'm assuming you're concerned about the use of this word because you're not concerned about climate change.
I've been a long-time user of z-lib and never had any issues. YMMV.
The limits to what I can visualise? Well, I'd put it this way - there definitely are limits, but what they are is a matter of training. There are traditions of mental training that challenge the practitioner to visualise increasingly complex things, so I've run into them.

A standard example of such visualisation is 'in bluish-white light on a dark background, imagine a line. from the same light, imagine drawing a circle using the line as a diameter. Now draw an equilateral triangle touching the boundary of the circle. Then a square around the triangle. Finally, draw another circle around the square, and hold the resulting image stable in your mind' (yes, this shape probably inspired Rowling's description of the deathly Hallows. It's a very old exercise).

I can visualise the line and the first circle easily. I can add the triangle, but at this point it already takes some effort, I can't do it if I'm even a little distracted. Typically, adding the square makes me 'lose' an earlier detail, usually the line, from my visualization.

That's probably not very informative to your question though, because visualization doesn't have the same sorts of rules around complexity a graphics screen does, the brain definitely uses some form of internal shorthand. I can picture a particular celebrity as easily as I can picture a circle, and picturing her holding an item from my grocery list in each hand is if anything somewhat easier than picturing two other elementary shapes connected to the circle. Maybe because humans are used to imagining other humans holding things, I'm not sure.

In any case, there are definitely limits to what a person can visualize, and they're pretty modest for the untrained mind, but it's quite unlike a graphics program where one could simply count the number of pixels required. Not sure if that helps or not...
I honestly found the writing in the Phoenix Project painful, but I'm surprised you're the only one to mention it since I've heard it come up a fair bit elsewhere. I think it's probably more popular in the more traditional IT world than HN's typical audience.
I haven't read all the legislation in the world on this, but DocuSign has. They have been summarising legislation into their knowledge base, and proudly showing off claims that they satisfy the requirements on their country-specific homepages. For example their page on Australian laws is here https://www.docusign.com/how-it-works/legality/global/austra..., and it summarises (almost verbatim) the Electronic Transactions Act 1999 (Cth)'s requirements like so:

> A method [...] is used to identify the signer and to indicate the signer’s intention to sign the document;

> The method used is as reliable as appropriate for the purposes of the communication or is proven to identify the person and indicate their intention; and

> The signer consents to the method used, with such consent allowed to be express or inferred from the circumstances.

Guess what? Australian courts apparently accept a name written at the bottom of an email as passing this test as being "as reliable as appropriate" for many situations. The barrier to entry in Australia is essentially zero. Europe has much stricter laws, introduced in the same year, in a two-tier arrangement where the strict version requires something like DocuSign, and moreover that the ability to produce a signature rests in the control of the person it identify, and that person only. (This paper http://www5.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/MqLawJl/2017/9.pdf argues for adopting the European approach in Australia.) A sibling comment identifies the US federal government's requirements as being essentially "we must approve individual e-sig services for use with the federal government", which is insane to me but there you go.

> Docusign is not attesting to the contracts they manage

... but they are attesting that they have read the laws about e-signatures, those claims are affirmed by their continued existence, and that's worth a lot of time otherwise spent second-guessing your chosen platform.

I knew roughly the position in Australia, but wasn't aware of the European requirements -- DocuSign has done a medium amount of work researching and documenting their compliance to give you peace of mind, and quite a lot of work complying with the stricter laws that are out there. There's nothing in that that is particularly difficult to replicate, i.e. there's no secret sauce, it's just a lot of work. The overall product (works for doing business with anyone you need it to) is more than the sum of its parts.
works fine on ios
Different wolf breeds and different environments (for example, elk heavy animal pops are different to hunt than deer, variations in forest type, elevation, water sources, human pop within radius, etc) combined make for too many variables.
I got a 4 letter one I never use and the amount of resets per day is crazy.

I don't share my daily email with websites but for whatever reason I used it with this Instagram account. It's the only spam I get at this point. 20 email resets per day!! It can't be hard to fix that
Thanks. This applies perfectly to the current organization I consult for with their newly spun up ML team.
Most languages can do most things, so you should pick the one(s) you know best.

That said traditionally perl would be the choice for parsing, and it is still a good candidate. For simple extraction - think "programatic grep" - then awk is also a good choice.
You seem to be attacking the weakest part of my idea and ignoring the strongest parts. Apparently, there is a new word for this: dunking [0]. Please stop.

Your replies go against the guidelines [1]:

> Be kind. Don't be snarky. Have curious conversation; don't cross-examine.

> Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith.

> Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29352131

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
"Expected value" means the mean of any distribution, not just ones shaped like bell curves. GP is correct.
but the data is not there! it's just displaying a partially-loaded image.
Cost of my 200gb LTE subscription come down to 17$. And its most expensive operator.
NBA is pretty crypto friendly though... Have you heard of BNA Top Shot?
Do you have a reference for this? Not that i don't believe you, but I recently moved away from California to my home state and I would love to know if this applies to my situation.
they seem to just keep rediscovering why current systems exist burning massive amounts of power and money along the way. I do hope something comes of it but so far it seems to be finding nearly all the local minimas.
> github goes down once a year on a saturday

> HN: REEEE THE CLOUD CANNOT BE TRUSTED BURN IT DOWN
He’s a delightful person in an affable curmudgeonly way.

Sadly I don't think Charlie would like me very much if we ever met. I'm an (American style) Libertarian, and he seems to have a rather strong disdain for us. Shame, as he's one of my favorite authors and I would otherwise say that he's somebody I'd rather enjoy meeting.
Sue for what?? Accounts are free. Go make another one.
There is nothing stopping a company doing a shareholder vote for every decision as far as I know.
Besides Australia and New Zealand, are there any particularly liberal countries in that corner of the world at all? The authoritarianism of the China aligned and/or left/communist Asian countries is well understood, but what of the rest?

South Korea spent much of the 20th century under military dictatorships, going from one military coup to another. Singapore's single-party system (with suspiciously fascist iconography[0]) is notorious for harsh authoritarianism. Japan today is a lot more liberal than it was a century ago, but their criminal conviction rate is too high to be believed and public support for the death penalty is around 80%. All three of these are nice countries in many respects, but I don't think any of them are particularly liberal by anglosphere standards.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flash_and_circle
There's trucks backed up at the ports, waiting their turn. Part of it is old design and part of it is a lack of need to actually speed things up to still make money as the port authority.
So what entity owns the intellectual property associated with the team, like the uniform design? What entity countersigns a player’s contract? Who pays the Internet bill at the Packers head office? “The commonwealth of Green Bay represented by its quarter million shareholders?”

There’s a board. And an entity. It’s a regular public company. It’s not like the hippies got together and founded the world’s most lax corporate governance in Green Bay, Wisconsin. It’s a corporation. Probably a C, but I’m too lazy to look. Come on, man. They have broadcast rights and multi-million dollar contracts. That’s simply not handled by a cooperative community water board with a treasurer. Yes, they’re publicly owned. But they’re owned. Formally, you know who the owners of a corporation are, and you know just as well as I do that the answer is not “nobody”.

You’re turning linguistic semantics into legal concepts, your esquireness, and leaning into the ambiguity of the word “owner”. And you’re really laying on this “I can’t possibly be wrong on a forum full of Node.js hackers” schtick you’re doing when challenged on any point. It’s okay to be wrong. Happens to all of us.

(Hint: you’re projecting the personal attack. Hope you don’t argue trial with that inability to read your counterparty.)
From experience, the legitimacy or authority of the signer has never been of question in cases brought to court. Maybe it's more relevant in the US, but in 99% of the cases I followed through has been around the interpretation of the actual terms.
I'm not sure what your trying to say. I have heard of breadlines and also the toilet paper shortage (in the US) in the 70s. I picked a couple of examples ready to mind, but there's countless more right now that form a constellation of points that eclipse any single phenomena taken from history.

Note that I'm also note saying things are worse right now than other times.

I'm saying things are stranger, weirder than other times, less predictable from 3 years earlier, as a civilization, than at other times of high chaos.
"Were" is the subjunctive. I think it comes to English from the German subjunctive form "wäre". It's not the same word as "were", as in "We were running".

The example you've chosen refers to an event in the past, so "were" seems to be ambiguous in that context, because it could be "you were there", prefixed by I wish - i.e. the writer isn't trying to use the subjunctive at all, which I think is nowadays OK.

"I wish you were here" is a clearer example. That is clearly present subjunctive. "I wish you had been here" would be referring to an event in the past - so that's some kind of past subjunctive.

I regret the death of the subjunctive.
This will obviously not work. But assuming you could get AML working for the DAO such that it doesn’t get legally nuked from orbit, for what assets would this model work better than existing systems? At first glance, its strengths appear to be of benefit to groups who are bad at keeping minutes/records, or keeping their treasurers from stealing their funds.
There's two ways to think of this as a deepfake:

1 - This is an actual video of the guy in his home, but they changed/synthesized the audio and then worked on the lip movements to make it match.

2 - This is a video of an actor impersonating the guy, possibly to the extent of impersonating his voice (although his timbre might make that a little tricky), and then they just deepfake the face on to the actor. An example of this is deeptomcruise on TikTok, something that you should treat yourself to if you haven't seen yet - https://www.tiktok.com/@deeptomcruise (first two today aren't great, here's a good one - https://www.tiktok.com/@deeptomcruise/video/7018171271095553... ? )

I'm not even convinced there's any alteration here, but even if there was both of the above could be possible. Adobe demoed something called VoCo in 2016 that never saw the light of day, not sure if there is something approximating this available today: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I3l4XLZ59iw&t=260s
I played a bit with Clojure and R in college, and I really liked them both. The next time I find myself computing some stats, I'll give this a try!
The Benefits of Emotional Diversity
A Case for Asynchronous Computer Architecture (2000) [pdf]
The Largest Organism Is Slowly Being Eaten
Windows - 'Flux' and dark theme

Linux - 'Safe Eyes' which asks me to take a 20 second break every 20 minutes.

Browsers - 'Dark Reader' in FF/Chrome

Android - Night Light matched with local sunset time