skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
A USB switch is a device that allows you to share USB devices among different computers. For instance, suppose you need to control 2 PCs. Rather than having 2 keyboards and 2 mice, a USB switch allows you to use a single keyboard and a single mouse to control both computers. You press a button on the switch to select which PC you want to control. But you still need 2 monitors...

If you only want a single monitor, there are switches that also switch between different video inputs. These are commonly referred to as "KVM switches" (KVM being Keyboard, Video, Mouse.) But KVM switches cost more money...

My understanding is this project allows you to use a plain USB switch and the multiple video inputs on your monitor to simulate a full blown KVM switch.
You're right, it was a bad take based on an old, strangely emotional experience I remember. Apologies
Good point! However, inside an event horizon we should have a preferred direction in which all the light cones that can catch up to us actually catch up to us (if Penrose diagrams hold true within an event horizon). That would mean that looking in that direction the universe would appear brighter and given how smooth is the CMB that doesn't seem to happen. It could still work if we assume that when this black hole was created either everything or nothing was causally connected to us.

Fascinating point!
Thanks for the recommendation internet Stranger! I just finished the book based on your comment here last week. Great read.
What stops someone from sending (large number) of transactions which each spend less than $YYY at any one time, but total much more than their balance?

If you have an actual person named and you have their street address and whatnot, you (rather, the bank) can hold them accountable for the missing money using like, laws and courts, but, if this is all pseudonymous internet money, there doesn’t seem to be much recourse?

So, in that case, the case where you have no recourse if they don’t actually have all that they’ve paid, it is important to be able to verify their current account balance including all transactions they’ve made so far, not just ones that have already been fully processed (or at least, be able to provide the good or service in a way that only takes effect insofar as they end up actually having enough money to pay).

If you could somehow limit the number of transactions they are capable of making in the given amount of time, what you said could work, but I don’t see how to achieve that?
I guess maybe if the computational cost of making a transaction was large enough, you could make the limit on the size of individual transactions small enough that they couldn’t produce enough to use their whole balance within the allotted time period, because they don’t have enough computational resources?

But then how do you know how much computational resources they have?
Seems like this could result in mining farms being able to spend more than they have.

Though, if this attack was only possible with a large hardware investment, one could still detect the attack afterwards, and just, delete the money spent this way?

Oh, or, if one can’t spend money that one got since the previous periodic amount of time, needing to wait until the next signed message from the bank, then, there would be no transactions that are only seemingly valid because of the invalid ones,
and so, then you just have people not getting the money they were expecting,
But if the only way this can happen is if someone makes a really big number of transactions, then probably many of the recipients were in on the scheme, and so them not getting the money is maybe fine??

Hm. But not clear how you could determine which ones were in on the scheme and which ones would be unfairly harmed by not getting the money they were promised.

Though, if you are going to have a bank centralizing things, why not just, send the transactions through the bank? Are they any more of a middleman when they process the transactions as part of the paying the money instead of later?
You can't sell the advantages that your degree or license confer to anyone else.

There's no reason for those to be an NFT.
>Without a published chain of transactions, there is no guarantee that the artist hasn't sold the same item multiple times.

That's a pretty glaring problem... and arguably the entire point of blockchain technology is to make tokens only spendable once.
I think each chain is its own economy when it comes to NFTs.
Stuff like this make me wonder if we'll have jobs in 15 years.
So ACME assumes it's harder to trick a LetsEncrypt server than it is to trick a random browser?
I was going to mention this too but they mentioned they had colleagues in common. I figured it probably wasn't a competitor, but if there is a chance that they are a competitor, this is more than likely what it is.
I'm sure the US and Russia will include backdoors into all of the drones they sell which will changes these dynamics a bit. Probably more likely to have proxy wars then rogue wars.
I would have agreed with that until news sites started popping videos into view as soon as you start reading their news articles. Since that became a way too common thing, I don't care enough for the other valid uses cases anymore and right away disable any sort of autoplay. :(
Right. Gotta realize we humans have to give these UAVs the space they rightfully claim on this planet... /s
How do you manage to scratch your phone? These days it's almost impossible on flagship phones.

Maybe you mean on the back, where sometimes they use cheaper glass?
I guess moving admin to a non-default path and dropping connections on default paths should work. nginx has a special 444 status code for dropping the connection [0]

[0] https://stackoverflow.com/questions/20709549/drop-unwanted-c...
Emotions are fine - sending the secret police to a parent's home - not fine and the student should be expelled.
Given an average 25 years per generation what blows my mind is this all occurred maybe 2500-3000 generations so.

If correct, that's a lot of diversity in so few generations. Image what could have been.
Just a theory but it might be from an ssh user where the log4j string somehow resolves in a reverse dns lookup from the originating ip. Even when the login fails the lookup will be done.
I costs a fortune to run The New York Times. I’m sure they feel that most of their stuff is in the public interest, in one way or another. If they want to charge for access as part of their business plan, that’s really up to them. I don’t see that as having a moral dimension. That being said, they maintain a paywall that seems to be deliberately trivial to get around.
Most people peddling it, including all the influencers and celebrities, are only in it as a get-rich-quick scheme with the small possibility of it gaining in value over time and paying dividends to the original artist every time the art is traded. But it's not bad technology, it works well for what it says - tracking a specific bitstream's history of sale so other technology can leverage said history to verify ownership.
How is it propaganda? I pay the solidarity tax like everyone else, so it’s literally money out of my pocket for… what?

East Germany doesn’t exist anymore, it’s just Germany. Why should we pay reparation tax in 2021?
That seems to be an opinion. Opinions vary. Mine does.
>This only counts if you’re buying it from the artist directly.

Yup, that's the point.

What value is there in a receipt that says "I paid money to the person that supported the artist"?
Dual Chinese Zen-Based CPUs Beat Ryzen 5 5600X in Multi-Threaded Workloads
Basic strategy: seize the high ground
Zoosk is a total scam dating app. I don't trust that guy
Metagrift
> Therefore the platform builds from an aggregation of independent services, more like the early Internet.

Same as creating an open protocol like the article suggests and getting participants to opt-in to supporting that protocol. The difference being that open protocols would require you to either accept _any_ provider or vet and choose which services you trust, vs the blockchain where the trust is in the chain itself and it's inability to be tampered with, i.e. the consensus you're talking about.

And the core of my criticism here is that the factors that give one person or a group of people the ability to tamper are the same; the companies that don't really experience consequences for bad behavior are large, well-funded, well-connected, and these things will also let you buy tons of mining rigs, low-power-cost facilities, and connect you with other wealthy miners who are interested in whenever the next DAO reversal needs to happen.
>But then in the findings it basically says it's a complete non-issue

As long as you don't live in California.

That was my kneejerk reaction, and then I saw the response to your comment confirming I nailed it.

Heck with reading the article.
Make sure that the monitor you are using actually supports input management through DDC. I have seen some monitors that expose only the color management.
There's no reason for that Reddit thing to be an NFT. Twitter or Discord could simply integrate w/ Reddit API and pull that shit up.
FYI - Massachusetts has historically had a Democratic legislature and Republican Governor, so it's not really a "one party state", though I think your point still stands. In fact, we had a republican senator not too long ago (Scott Brown).
I have heard this but last I heard, not sure a source or time to search right now, that the courts have been favoring our side and don't really want the average Canadian being sued. They are going after the commercial entities reselling these services like streaming site operators. The thing is to download only which sucks because it is not nice to be a leech. At this point in time very few people worry about it. Back in the day I used to download hundreds of GB per month in video games movies and tv shows. Now I will find the odd movie I never had a chance to watch.
Has the tax evasion claim been at all substantiated beyond hypothetical pontification?
I won't even unbox without a case on hand. I know myself!
Now imagine that any industry can easily do the same thing stubhub did without reinventing the wheel every time.
The only thing the distributed encrypted ledger does is tell you what wallet owns what token.

It does not tell you if the artist has sold the piece multiple times.
Talk about missing the point.

I don't really care for NFTs either way but the guarantee of being the sole owner is surely the only thing that gives them any value.
Fascinating! Thanks for sharing.
Many cities do little to nothing about bike theft. I've sat in meetings with a prior police chief of the city of Santa Cruz where he flat out stated, unless the owner sees the theft (or an officer does), they will not do anything. At the time, multiple other cities I spent time in (the east bay) would at least make contact with and check on people. If the person had bike theft tools on them, they'd be arrested.

Bike theft is one of the rampant issues in areas with excessive drug use, etc. Nearly every homeless encampment in west coast cities will have one or more people with piles of bikes and bike parts.
So in terms of 16 requests, that's nothing. Something actually malicious would be thousands.

Either this person is setting up to do something malicious and hasn't even started, or they're more likely studying your sign up process, struggling with it, and have a short memory so they did it many times over 15 days.

The fact is, having an open form on the internet is like having an open invite to come shit in your toilets.

Since this person is within your industry, I'd just poke them and ask. That will most likely make them stop. The fact that they use their own IP address and used a real email address means to me that this person is non-malicious.

Plus point for sending them a report of their own activity, real time as they submit it, to their email address.
All but one state (in '19) was under single party control. https://twitter.com/ncslorg/status/1060137062853160961?lang=...
Well, I think you sorta can. Your boss can say, if you don't stop joking around, and don't follow the rules, I will shoot you. We have an evolutionary predisposition to avoid pain and death and the whole social structure on top of that, and this ensures that sometimes we just have to be honest.

Which is one of the reason why I think we need at least two levels of learning for general intelligence. The bottom learner is the one which learns the actual task at hand, and the top learner is tasked (with learning) to, given a description of a task, produce (train if needed) a bottom learner that can solve that task. This solves the ambiguity, because if we are confident enough that the top learner can produce correct bottom learners for different descriptions, then adding another rule to the description will likely cause the bottom learner (produced by the top learner) to also obey that rule.

It also resolves the understanding problem, because while no learner might be sure if it is itself correct, the top learner has to somehow evaluate the bottom learner, and so the top learner sees where bottom learner is failing to understand (which rules are problematic). What's even more interesting, if the language to express the problems is rich enough, then we can apply the top learner to itself as the bottom learner (express the actual learning setup from within the language), and we get sort of a "philosopher", entity that tries to learn how best to build learners. (This is an interesting analogy you can make with Futamura projection, by thinking about "learners" instead of "programs", and what happens if learners are tasked to produce another learner. The reason why we can be somewhat confident in "correctness" of the bottom learners is similar to reason why we can be somewhat confident that compiled program does what we want, despite it being completely new to the compiler.)

There are multiple ways to map this top/bottom learners onto humans. You can think of the bottom learner as the actual intuitive systems that we have, and the top learner as the conscious system, which drives what we are gonna learn and how. Or the bottom learner as the system that contains the model of the environment, and the top learner as a system that provides episodic learning via some kind of simulation (our dreams, imagination) to it, and reflects on it. Or the bottom learners are individual humans, while top learners are the genes that drive the evolution of the human brain. In practice, there might be more than two levels.
Yes exactly. It can certify the owner...
There are far more fictional TV characters than there are types of wood. I'm a hobbyist woodworker and TV snob but could still many more characters than woods.
IMHO it's because Substack was not designed with heavy commenting in mind. And its mandatory JavaScript only makes matters worse (good luck getting the position where you were last in the comments saved !)
Oh dear I hope that wasn’t me. I went through an erlang phase. ;)
I am currently studying 3D computer graphics.

Interesting (to me) that if you pause the video at 38 seconds you see a mesh of triangles... which are the same building blocks the computer uses to create 3d objects as well.
"people starve while others have so much but such is the universe"

People die of blacklung, scurvy and smallpox, they die in slavery...

Oh wait, they don't any more. Later generation will look down at our barbarism the same way we look at tribes of cannibalistic neanderthals.
sort of raises an interesting question. rust has memory safety, but it's still possible to write code that "isn't up to code." i wonder if maybe rust+1 will be the first language/environment/ecosystem that has application development security principles built in. that would mean, like, not just taking the compiler forward in terms of memory safety, but also codifying a set of principles, enforcing those that can be statically checked in the compiler with the compiler, and aggressive curation for a singular library archive (similar to how some internet library archives require unit tests or style, etc).
The blockchain aspect allows for easy interop: how do you use your csgo skin in roblox?
On an Intel 7700k, using `LIBGL_ALWAYS_SOFTWARE=1` to force llvmpipe, glxgears reports ~3900fps, compared to ~20000fps on GPU (RX570 amdgpu).
An affordable home to raise 2-3 kids in with space to enjoy the outdoors that isn’t an hour or more from my job.

A job that pays well, has good benefits and health insurance, that doesn’t make me work nights, early mornings, holidays, snow days, or weekends, so I can have that priceless time with my family.

Normal desires that are increasingly becoming the privilege of the landed elite.
Doing it right sometimes pays off in the long run, but cutting corners always pays off now.
The NSA recommends P-7 with full incineration. Fellowes has a P-7 model, but do you really want to spend $7,000 on disposing of your credit card statements. P-5 and P-6 are acceptable for home use. P-4 is also acceptable if you aren't really trying to hide anything and just want to dispose of those credit card offers, CVS receipts and that printout you received from your vet. Disposal security sits right alongside digital security in that you have to ask yourself, how much of a target do you consider yourself to be?

I use a P-4 shredder, also from Fellowes, that cost a couple of hundred bucks, that replaced a burnt out P-2 shredder I got for $30 from Staples. I am considering going to a higher capacity P-5 if I can find one at a reasonable price on eBay, mainly for the extra shredding capacity and the hopper feeder than any additional security it provides.

How seriously do I take my disposal security in my home? Well, I'm not a target, and there are other higher value targets with less security, so why would they go after me. I shred any mail or paperwork I don't wish to keep physical copies of, but it sits in the "to be shredded" basket near the shredder for a good six months before I get around to it. There's an oppportunity there, if I were a target. And the "to be shredded" basket will contain bills from my medical insurance provider, phone bills, ISP bills, electricity bills, cheques I've deposited, grocery receipts.

Whilst I practice good op-sec within my house -- no paperwork leaves without being shredded, tightened network security, VLANs for suspicious devices, locked down networks, and 2FA where appropriate -- I'm not a target and I have very little reason to be a target, so I don't need an onerously heavy shield. I'm cautious, not paranoid.

You need to evaluate your disposal security within the context of "what is convenient" rather than "what is best."
Nothing capitalistic about student loans.

Remove government loan guarantees and cost of college will drop drastically.
Is an NFT different from other blockchain transactions? If I steal your wallet, am I also stealing your NFTs? If an NFT is designed to send some percentage of a sale to the person who minted it, is there a way to prevent me from selling you my wallet without going back to the blockchain?
How to effortlessly launch an idea and smoke test it
try yourself at https://plygrnd.xyz
Stacher: Beautiful cross-platform GUI for YouTube-dl / yt-dlp
The NFT you’re buying is like a tuple (cryptocurrency, address, tokenID)

So you already know what blockchain you’re using. It’s like saying “what facebook are you using? The ftp one or the http one or the https one?”
I found that JD's document was a moderately anti-diversity screed, tho. I did a deep read (the document, everything the document linked to, most of the things that those linked to) back when it all went down.

IMO, while James raised a valid question ("how do we know any of this is working, or even can work?"), some of his mistakes were in attempting to answer it (instead of solidly beginning a conversation); attempting to answer it on his own (instead of recruiting a diverse group of backgrounds to answer it); attempting to present his answers as more substantial than the underlying investigation could support (instead of doing a substantive sociological investigation); in the answers he provided (aligned with historical misogynistic orthodoxy); how he presented those answers (in a way not inviting or encouraging questioning); etc. I really, really wonder what would have happened if he'd sought out diverse co-authors.

Ironically, (AFAICT) the entire core issue of diversity in the first place is answering questions from/with only one perspective; and (AFAICT) much of the core issue of equity is having people with one perspective answering important questions for people with a different perspective.

So there really wasn't any possible way for him to succeed at anything beyond raising the question, on his own.
>It does not tell you if the artist has sold the piece multiple times.

If you purchased a NON-FUNGIBLE-token, you can be sure that nobody else owns the same array of bytes which may or may not prove that you own a piece of art.

There may be many prints of the same original work created in multiple NFTs as there are in the art world... but it's not possible to sell the same NFT twice... on the blockchain at least... without re-acquiring it first.

Plenty of NFT sellers sell multiple issues/prints/copies of the same original artwork.

I think digital prints in NFT format are ridiculous but I digress.
That's actually kinda funny because at first I couldn't think of a single reason why that doesn't solve exactly the same problem.

I guess you can't prove who is 'in control' of the repo - the author could have sold the key privately and there's no way to tell if they sold it to multiple new owners.

Kinda like art in the 'real world' - you can 'prove' its the original but no way to tell whos hands its changed through over the years.
> We have an official definition.

Lol how is it 'official'? Who officiated it?
What do you think the transaction cost is in Ethereum for your NFT ticket? Cause from what I'm seeing right now, it's equal to the cost of your fancy concert ticket. 2 sales (one to the scalper, one to the sucker) means you've just paid 300% of the cost before the middleman even got paid.
...and as long as that blockchain in particular is still in operation. Maintaining a blockchain is not cheap, therefore there is very real possibility that at some point in the future nobody is interested in maintaining it.
Helping the poor is meaningful… to your life. Inherently life only has meaning that we ourselves attach to it.
So it’s replicating the worst thing about the art market — the speculation and nonsensical pricing. But without the best thing about the art market — actually owning a piece of art.

With a thin veil of technobabble.
You could create nice GUI programs with Delphi with just basic Pascal knowledge, you didn't even have to know about pointers, initializers, virtual functions, templates or any of the crap that comes with C++.
I believe it's discussed in the article.
No, he is mixing up two distinct things. One is trusting the artist (to be honest and manage their career, in the widest sense).

The other is trusting that out of hundreds of people who owned this artwork before, everyone deleted their signature file.

This model does not track ownership and therefore does not solve the usecase that an NFT is solving.
How to create a slack approval workflow
He was livestreaming the wifi work today:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7kOlrBUKAfM

I only glanced at the last minute, sounds like it's not working, but pretty close (I could have interpreted his comments wrong though).
A friend of mine had his car stolen, his ex had a key and wanted to make him mad. We live in a rural area so the sheriff just dropped it off at his house once they recovered it. He even put gas in it and invited us to shoot at his range.

I've also seen cops change tires and things like that.