skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Which might not be a scam.

I'm not saying it's not a scam either.

But it's something where it's really not clear if it's a scam or not.

Because minting money is a pretty normal thing in finance, especially if you want to avoid deflation.

And for any normal currency deflation is one of, maybe the worst thing which can happen to it.

Which puts a strange view on crypto currencies as many of them are fundamental deflationary.

New they do have the benefit of (in general) not being bound to the economics of a country, and hence forth might be ok with being deflationary.

But even then if you create a crypto currency which is meant to be used as a currency inflation is still bad.

Hence why IMHO Bitcoin is a security which you happen to be able to use a currency, not a currency.

But that's not true for all crypto currencies, which likely lead to regulatory nightmares. Both for the regulators and even more so for anyone who wants to use crypto currencies as currencies, as the crypto security BitCoin is currently the face of crypto currencies.

It's such a mess, but has potential nevertheless.

But not necessary in the way it is advertised. (Like potential as securities, potential for some convenient/pragmatic things, potential for resolving certain trust/management issues, potential to undermine government regulations for both good and bad from both good and bad governments. Naturally not in the same currency. But if you are into crypto currencies for anarchistic or socialistic world view, to create a more fair world, you are probably in the wrong place).
Japanese cops deliver warnings in replies to crime-linked social media messages
So in your mind there's either professional endurance sports, or everybody is getting "weak and fat"? And of course, if everybody is a professional athlete, stuff like plumbing, growing food, medicine, all these things will still just grow on trees, correct? Or is your point that we won't be weak and fat since we won't even survive birth?

Either you just wrote without thinking about it for one second, or you actually think that. I'm not up for exploring either option, and there is no third.
Think it's important to distinguish between tech changes and UI changes here.

The former is somewhat inevitable I think, the later is often an unnecessary irritation.

Some UI redesigns are good & necessary but many seem to be just for the sake of it. A bit like if you're paying UX designers they're never going to say "yep it is good as is" since that would raise questions about why a company is paying X thousands to people not doing anything. So you get this endless stream of reshuffling existing stuff with no real value add and often a negative from the confusion. Which ironically is a pretty horrible user experience.

See also icon changes on phones. There too the changes are breaking a lot of the user experience (quickly finding what you're looking for based on familiar icons) for the sake of well not much value add. Every icon looking like a rainbow definitely didn't improve my life.
This is actually not the case in quite a few countries nowadays. It Italy there is now a crime of "murder by driving" that gets automatically charged if there are victims in a car accident.

Maybe it's time to make financial-crime penalties a bit harsher.
What are LCP and FID?
Reminds me of the Scorpion and the Frog:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Scorpion_and_the_Frog

Why would a corporate owned proprietary app or website ruin its own interface?

Because that is its nature, it's fundamentally only in alignment with user wishes until it's half way across the river.
Let's turn your question on its head: if using an application fighting to keep users' privacy as high as possible, such as Signal, just as easy as using Whatsapp, why use the latter ?
They seem to be almost ready to make a new 0.9.0 release, by the way: https://github.com/ziglang/zig/milestone/11
I'd say one would suffer a lot more with borked shoes than torn upper clothing.
In my mind agile, is about avoiding committing to a particular direction before verifying that it's the right one, and in a lot of cases (particularly in the startup world), verification requires shipping to potential customers.

Agility doesn't promise fastest time to delivery. It's acknowledging that you'll probably build the wrong thing, so it's about making it easier to course-correct.

The failure state of agile (waterfall hidden behind agile ceremony) is usually triggered by leadership/management teams not willing to _truly_ delegate. Once process becomes dominated by accountability and visibility (which I've never seen not happen with Scrum), rather than supporting the people doing the work, all bets are off.
So you are saying that agile happened because of coders and not because there were fundamental problems with using waterfall on large projects?

No part of agile says that you get rid of planning and organizing, it is just done in smaller slices in shorter cycles.

Having used both over 25 years, I wouldn't look back at waterfall for any project except the very smallest. No-one allows you to lock some requirements in for 5 years any more, something that was accepted back in the day. I have plenty of examples of waterfall projects that delivered a number of things that simply weren't required any more and that was a failure of a long-tail project plan.

Agile also allows you to work iteratively on a project that is never finished i.e. SaaS, which is not possible with waterfall.
Source in German, but German industrial giants like BASF are doping exactly that:

https://www.focus.de/finanzen/steuern/fiskus-geht-leer-aus-m...

I couldn't find a source for Siemens et all that quickly, they are doing it as well so. As is any other DAX listed company (that isn't loosing money).
Apparently he has risen from the grave then.
KYC is only required (by law, with which Brave must comply) for those wishing to cash-out (or deposit their own) BAT (into or out of the Rewards Wallet). No KYC is required for the use of Brave's general-purpose "Brave Wallet". Also, no KYC is required for users who wish to earn BAT (via Brave's privacy-respecting Ads) and use said BAT to support content creators.

Sampson (Brave Team)
4% of the workforce being shoemakers seems enormous. One person working full time making shoes for every fifty-ish adults?

I don't know what the right comparison is today. According to [0], the fashion industry accounts for about 3% of world GDP. Perhaps shoes are a quarter of that?

[0] https://fashinnovation.nyc/fashion-industry-statistics/
Advanced pattern matching is called science and has been how humans have made progress by taking data and writing down models for them. Now computers do it. End to end algorithms are 'black box' but machine learning in general is much broader than that and is providing understanding in many fields. Sorry you only see/know the "draw a box around a pedestrian' stuff, but try not to judge entire fields based off of limited exposure.
In platforms like HN you Oftentimes can't tell if some comment is sincere expression of the views or a sarcastic parody.
An example is the following HN comment by pornel about posting a video using nft, ipfs etc to avoid YT. Can't still tell.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29458246
It's terrifying that the punishments are so draconian (because one false move and you lose access to the entire Google account, and possibly become persona non-grata and lose the ability to create another one even in a company context), it's hard to understand what the rules are, the appeals process generally won't help, and even being a paying customer won't save you.

It seems like best practice for any professional who needs to use Google anything would be to avoid Google to the greatest extent possible except in professional contexts, lest some inadvertent mistake (or something malicious like a hack) cripple your career.
>What if the friction of authoring software was reduced to the point that the easiest output of "analyze" was .. working software?

Well, the software world is certainly working hard - on one side - to reasonably attain this goal, while another big portion of it actively resists this advancement in human social services, such that it represents.

Perhaps that is the key thing to all of this: "Until all of us are using waterfall, many of us will have a hard time using waterfall." I'm not sure I like where this leads, so I'll just agree with you that sometimes you just have to crash rockets.
The "extremes" are good in their appropriate extreme niche: spacecraft flight control software is definitely engineering and it has to be perfect the first time (no exploration or iteration), while the only prudent and efficient way to publish a website with a day's notice requires a rushed MVP and then as many small edits and additions as fit in the available time.

In the middle of the spectrum there are varied tasks, for which an excess of waterfall can force the creation of low-value documents (e.g. hundreds of pages of up-to-date screenshots of complex forms instead of describing in detail only interesting data and interesting workflow and honestly stating that UI layout will be arbitrarily reorganized according to stakeholder feedback after every demo until they are happy) and an excess of agility can be an obstacle to correct design (e.g. publishing a mock incomplete version of some service without taking a couple of days to determine whether the data needed to actually implement it is going to be available).
> less durable product that's many times less harmful to produce.

A big citation needed here… I am not sure boots made from locally-sourced leather are less sustainable than boots made from synthetic fibers and petroleum derivates some place in South-East Asia.
Democratic Peace Theory
From the OpenBSD Copyright Policy (https://www.openbsd.org/policy.html) just for a different perspective from another FOSS project:

"While this may superficially look like a noble strategy, it is a condition that is typically unacceptable for commercial use of software. So in practice, it usually ends up hindering free sharing and reuse of code and ideas rather than encouraging it..."
It's not a bad suggestion, but it still doesn't satisfy the requirement. You can't put it all in a single executable if that is what you want
Church worker; social worker: what's the difference?
Not really open source but a small one time fee.
https://sendy.co/
A month's YouTube Music sub would be well within the jurisdiction of small claims, that'd cost them at least some lawyer time to respond!
For python this open access book is excellent: https://github.com/rougier/scientific-visualization-book
Funding, Flywheels and the Future of Healthtech with Folklore Ventures
>Australian dollars

Perhaps Waterfall (and its cousins) needs an addendum: Check for and Remove Corruption.
They had Moxie Marlinspike, who is behind Signal, audit their encryption code. Of course, we can't know if the code they let him audit is actually the code that gets deployed, and it's also been a few years since then, but the E2EE has been independently confirmed.
Anonymity comes at a price.
Can product feedback be a growth strategy instrument?
I think it's good that well-founded institutions publish well-crafted datasets for everyone else.
It helps small teams develop their model.

The problem here is, though, most publishers don't accept papers if the new proposal isn't backed by benchmarks by the well-known datasets.
Even though it can be a competitive approach for a specific field, they reject the paper anyway if it's not performed well on the datasets.
It is hard because more people means more opinions.

* Involving the developers in everything that the product team does as well as all of their own work is too inefficient.
* Involving the wrong developer means you might not ask the right questions up-front.
* Some developers are too negative and block things early on
* Some developers are too positive and will say yes to everything even if it is unreasonable
* There is not always a clear authority between product owners and developers
* A lot of decisions are based on company priorities that might need someone outside of the product/development team to argue for
The model coded in the bird's brain for obstacle avoidance and hunting has application to swarming flying machines. Flying through a randomly variable width hole or sequenced as a tunnel is like the removalist's piano problem in AI research.
> I see PMs/POs/Developers etc. that never had any formal training in agile/Scrumm (books, courses, experience) but rather learn-by-observation, i.e. "do what others do".

Ahh, good old cargo cult Scrum.

I've seen a bunch of this when consulting. People use all the right terms, but nothing else really makes sense. There is a "daily standup" done sitting down and it lasts up to 45 minutes. There are "sprints" that last from 2 to 12 weeks with no deliverables. There is grooming, which is just chatting and maybe looking at Jira a bit.

Scrum can be done right, but it requires the WHOLE organisation to be trained to do it properly. Preferably by a very very very expensive Scrum Consultant so that even the C-staff put some weight in their words. (expensive == good)
It all boils down to what a good job means for a human. I may be special but I find a few axis that I need:

- skillful

- useful

- well organized enough

Today people don't do much, they don't master much, most of it is done far away in large shops or plants. It's rarely that useful (we're overwhelmingly comfy) and recent management practices are surreal most of the time.

I talked to a few people that prefered low wage in exchange for more skills or usefulness, even if the job might look less impressive in the first place.
What do you mean but whining?

I'm not DeFi fan (not by a long shot), but complaining about the practices of centralised services seems exactly in line with what a pro-DeFi person would do. There's no hypocrisy here.
Honest opinion: Its not a matter of size. Its a matter of completeness. Agile or waterfall processes fail if you omit the Qualification step, or if you don't ensure that the analysis produces actionable requirements, or clearly formulated specifications that lead to requirements, user/technical/or otherwise.
It would be trivially easy to throw away half a billion dollars like this. All you'd have to do is have a winning ticket for a $500MM lottery jackpot in your pocket and put it through the laundry.

Crypto is gambling. People have done it for millennia. You invent some system and some arbitrary rules about what’s valuable (the right domino, an ace of hearts, a jpeg of a monkey, a beanie baby) and then some people win some money and some people lose.

This guy won, and then he lost. Oh well. Just like with the lost lottery ticket no enterprise of actual value has been created or destroyed by this misfortune.
I prefer to use a desktop setup with LCD monitors over an arm's length away. I noticed that with laptops, the screen was too close and I started needing reading glasses to see the display clearly.

I try to spend some time outdoors, looking into the distance. Natural light and focusing on distant objects to counteract the tendency to short-sightedness.
Java library management system project source code
Sorry for not being more clear. What I mean is having two separate 3d plots for the time domain, so one can look at both domains at the same time (and keep the ability to rotate etc.). Super cool would be if one could come up with a way that changing the view/rotation of one plot would change the view of the other, i.e. for example if one rotates the "time-domain" plot to only show the imaginary part, the frequency domain part would only show the corresponding FT. That might be very hard to do in practice however, because it's not straight-forward "mapping" and one should keep the ability to rotate/pan etc., maybe with some checkbox button?
It amazes me that HN, and Twitter, is the only customer service for a multi-billion dollars company like Google.
One could argue that exercising is a waste of energy altogether.

You should be contributing that energy to something of value, eg. farming, construction work, postal work...

You can always reduce waste and optimise things further, but we are not strictly optimising, rational beings either.
> > You cannot analyse how users will empirically interact with a product that does not yet exist.

> I don't agree with this, as I believe it is very, very glib

This implies that all A/B testing is worthless, which is .. surprising.
True and also employ close to 1.5M employees globally who pay taxes.
That's ignoring a lot of structure induced jobs. Often nobody wants it done but you can't fire a person so you invent a role. Or sometimes the need is mostly a factor of higher rank carelessness or incompetence.. fix the tooling and there's no need to hire 5 more guys to grind through endless papers or mails.
LCP: Largest Contentful Paint: "render time of the largest image or text block visible within the viewport, relative to when the page first started loading"

https://web.dev/lcp/

FID: First Input Delay: "the time from when a user first interacts with a page to the time when the browser is actually able to begin processing event handlers in response to that interaction"

https://web.dev/fid/
Istio with Let's Encrypt Example
> Do you realize this ideia of poison alcohol was propaganda done by the government

Methanol poisoning is a VERY real thing. Methanol is easily accidentally produced when using a poorly calibrated still and not throwing out enough of the early product, particularly while processing alcohol made from corn where pectin helps create methanol. It’s very real and very dangerous.

The problem is ethanol (the good alcohol) laced with a small amount of methanol won’t immediately cause obvious health issues, they tend to creep up over time especially given continued consumption.

The government did however also purposely release horribly adulterated alcohol into the black market during prohibition and literally kill people, which is probably where your belief of it all being propaganda comes from.

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methanol_toxicity

- https://sciencing.com/test-alcohol-methanol-8714279.html

- https://slate.com/technology/2010/02/the-little-told-story-o...
I think your 5000 requests per month for the businesss tier are a bit on the low side.
Especially, since there is nothing above that.

Maybe add a "Need more? Contact us" tier.

Also, I'd love to use this with technologies other than PHP.
I use Rocket (Rust) in one of my projects and tried to check out the standalone cli as my only option.

The link to it didn't work on firefox mobile.

Thankfully clicking on any of the PHP things worked and brought me to the same docs where I could then navigate to the CLI.

Maybe highlight it more that you don't even need special integration with the Webserver, since it's possible to preprocess pages with your cli utility.

That part was not immediately obvious and might have turned me away, had I not been determined to see what the CLI tool did.
Well, we have names for that: "horse" and "donkey".

I get that having formal names is useful, and basing those names on ancestral characteristics seems sensible. But it doesn't seem to take into account that this is a moving target: everything is evolving, and populations are not going to stay the same over time. Trying to classify every living thing into neat categories is like herding a million very slow cats. Especially with palaeontology, where the timespans are large enough for evolution to really matter.
If both ends and the server are all controlled by the same entity: it largely doesn't matter if it's E2EE or not.

You can obviously argue that they can't siphon away information at the server level; but if you don't trust whatsapp/signal/telegram at that level then you're boned anyway because they could quite easily activate the 'whatsapp web' function and exfiltrate information via whatsapp servers.

Ideally we'd have clients and servers and server operators as distinct and uncoordinated individuals, which would have to work in conjunction with each other to unravel your messages: but there's no incentive for them in place to do that.

I, a server operator, can pass encrypted traffic, that data is encrypted with clients I don't/can't control.

I, a client software developer can make encrypted traffic, but messages can only be passed on networks I can't control. (and if it didn't, this would be easy to spot).

I, a server software developer can write software which allows traffic to be passed but does not promote an operator to exfil even encrypted data.

We have this with Matrix, IRC, XMPP etc;

IMO if you're going to use Whatsapp; it's the same as if you use telegram or signal; I understand that this opinion is controversial but you're choosing convinience over security and E2E doesn't mean anything if you have one entity controlling the ends.
Vishal Garg CEO of Better.com fires 900 employees over Zoom meeting [video]
> ...There is a natural process that every issue goes through: Analysis, Specifications, Requirement, Design .. then the Developer takes in the materials of each of these steps...

What do Developers do before it's a green light for them to start the dig? What do Designers do before it's "their step"? What do they do afterwards? What about those in preceding stages?

Well, they might as well do whatever else next that falls on their seats, but sure everyone still cares to see the "final output", that is the developed and tested product. Yet it's inevitable for them to switch their context to something else meanwhile.

And this detachment is what makes Waterfall process often protracted and resistant to change. Not speaking that there's also a Customer somewhere in that pipeline, hoping to derive some value and feed some form of input.

Some industries/companies/teams/products may be just ok with waterfall or no methodology at all. Other situations may want shorter cycle or even parallel efforts to stay in line with demand/constraints/risks.

Also, there's a "working software" factor too. Call it a PoC/proto/early demo... It not only tests the ideas, it also motivates to keep going or offers assurances that it will be done "right".

If anything natural there is to any process is that most professionals want to do their jobs well and be proud of their effort, preferrably rewarded for the success and not singled out for blame of failures.

The question is then how to create such an environment to make that possible.

Agile on not, what cargo-cults it is the general lack on internal vitality in some industries/companies/teams/products. And as such it affects the very professional values on all levels, eroding the collective "care" about the result or even the process itself.
I don't think people realize how much money JP makes.

A cursor search shows that the fine is less than 10% of their last quarter NET income of 12.1 billion.

I would certainly keep doing illegal things if my only penalty was a simple fine like that every 10 years.
If the defendant doesn't show up that doesn't stop the hearing. A google lawyer likely costs more than the damages.