skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Upvoted for the subtle and relevant use of “cooke”.
The Peter principle.
My point though being-- even with AC it's a good innovation. We are all chronically short on sleep these days. I'm surprised about the resistance to it in this thread.
> where you would be comfortable storing an amount of money that's important to you?

I wouldn't. I'd give it to an insured institution in my local jurisdiction to look after. It's not a perfect solution but it doesn't rely on the horrible impermanence of IT.
The point of democracy is to try to make it represent the people. Often, it fails.
I don’t see an option for filtering by salary.
Unless it’s just missing from mobile web
This is the sort of websites we need more of. It's simple, fast and useful, and not monetized at the users' expense.
Looking at other technology adoption curves is interesting and difficult. Bitcoin (the "digital cash" vision) was released in 2009. It didn't register on Google Trends until 2011. This already isn't a good sign.

Ethereum came along in 2015 and introduced the concept of the Ethereum Virtual Machine and smart contracts. Now "blockchain" is a bona fide platform where people can leverage Ethereum and the underlying blockchain network to build things. Another question - why did it take six years for blockchain technology to progress from digital cash to platform?

Now seven years after that even when combining digital cash (payments), "store of value"/gambling (trading, speculation), and all things smart contract (NFTs, DAO, ENS, microlending, etc) there are still at best 100 million total users for all of these use cases combined.
Hardly any rogan advocates are saying young shouldn’t be able to do this, at least according to my Twitter feed.

In fact people are happy with young being able to do it and basically laughing at him.

So I don’t think anti young people are somehow not understanding what free speech is.

What they are critiquing is someone who spent his life being anti power and establishment doing the bidding of an establishment who’s also spread plenty of misinformation about Covid and many other things.

(And on a side note, rogan actually had opposing sides on as well, the CNN health guy. I don’t see anyone on the public health side actually being willing to engage with any of the people questioning their judgement, they just dismiss them as anti science. And it turns out a lot of things they were right about. Cloth masks being the most recent example, but you can count the lab leak hypothesis and many other things among them)
Lots of different things live on the Ethereum blockchain: there's ETH itself, which we might call "raw money", and then there are abstract tokens (of both the fungible and non-fungible sort).

To make a programming analogy, there are lots of systems which are "generic" over tokens — they can deal with many kinds of token, as long as it's the standard shape. Raw money doesn't have this shape, so WETH is a very simple "wrapper token". You can trade 1 ETH for 1 WETH and then use it in some token-compatible system.

The exchange rate for WETH is fixed by the (very short) contract, and it's supposed to be simple to trade money for tokens or vice versa — although given this poor sod's story, it's arguably not that simple after all.
That depends if most people think Neil Young is right or wrong.

And other than Joni Mitchell so far, it looks like the rest of the artists in the world are siding with Spotify.

Because even if you don't agree with Joe Rogan you have to agree that cancel culture is wrong and expression of a variety of views is valuable.

Artists seem like the wrong group of people to try to get to side with you on censorship.
WETH is Wrapped Ether. It fulfills the conditions of an ERC-20 token, so other contracts always interact with WETH not ETH. Most of this is obfuscated away so that users don't have to have WETH in their wallet for transactions.
I tried to buy bike inner tubes on Amazon and I just could not do it. I would do a search, go to a product page, and the thing I wanted simply was not on that product page. I wound up going to a local bike shop and was in and out in less time than I had spent trying to find them online.
Heh. Even in bicycle-rich countries like Germany and the Netherlands, these numbers are somehow still tricky. I guess it doesn't help that they are often hard to read and a lot of the numbers are actually redundant.

So yeah, useful! And my compliments for the neatness in your data privacy approach.

At one point I just took the old tyre into a bicycle repair shop and asked for the proper replacement, and the person who sold me one even managed to get the wrong one (they replaced it for the proper one afterwards of course). It used to be that most normal use bicycles all had the same tyre, and only racing bikes had those weird French style ones, but newer bicycles tend to have fatter tyres (which is not a bad development for sturdy day-to-day bicycles laden with groceries, an adult cyclist, and a child in front or behind the cyclist).
Thanks, this link definitely helps to cross-check if I got the mapping right.
The amusing thing in all of this is that Neil Young has unleashed the Streisand Effect. People who never knew that a person called Joe Rogan exists are now not only aware of who he is but also have been told that his show contains forbidden information, which pretty much guarantees a bunch of new people will end up checking it out.
It would be impossible to do it otherwise.
Hi HN! I love the concept of ranked-choice voting, so I thought it would be useful for situations that often spawn a survey. This site is pretty darn simple--no accounts, totally free for the time being.

I hope others find this useful :) And I'm dog-fooding a bit to figure out what features are worth adding [0]. Looking forward to getting feedback!

[0] https://rankedchoicesurvey.netlify.app/?id=t0layfiZ5YWXZ7jUe...
What's your ideal healthcare situation and how do we get there from the current one?

Broad platitudes like "everyone should have access to healthcare" doesn't count
Exactly. It’s not really hypothetical. I first heard about the pizza delivery attack it on dark net diaries podcast: https://darknetdiaries.com/transcript/97/

It was used to make someone give up his Twitter/Instagram account handle. They sent him tons of pizzas from different restaurants, and started also attacking other family members
Well you didn't ask for profitable businesses, this is just to dispute that AI efforts are only for better ad targeting.

I wouldn't be surprised if Tesla is operating it's AI efforts at a loss as well.
For 2) you might want to look into :lcd. This changes the directory of the current window (there are other commands to cd for different contexts). So what I do is ctrl-w v to split, followed by :lcd /some/path and then, in that window, I can use my fuzzy finder (or :grep).

It's still quite a few commands but the advantage is that you get a buffer where all your commands should operate on $other_repo.
Because the compiler makes assumptions on the valid layouts of a type, e.g. packing Option<bool> in a single byte. Prior to 2018 it was assumed the UB was only on read like C but that turned out not to be the case. To avoid this the type has to reflect that it might be uninitialized - hence the transparent MaybeUnit wrapper.
I always liked the stick shift versus automatic for drivers ed analogy.

Yet in an era where inclusiveness and student retention are deemed more important than foundational learning, its no wonder Python is getting mass adoption.
And this mentality is what will block wider adoption of crypto. Calling people dumb for not understanding a non-intuitive system (after there's so much prior, "return to sender" art in the world) will not get them to use crypto.
The modern AQM's are based on "Time in Queue". Both pie and codel work brilliantly with pause frames, so long as BQL is also in the driver. fq+aqm (be it codel, pie or cobalt) works even better.

See:

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8290

https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/aqm/documents/

https://arxiv.org/abs/1804.07617

Adding AQM and FQ wifi was way, way harder, (apenwarr drove the group at google that did some of it), but there is full support for fq_codel now in the mt76, ath9k, ath10k, iwl, and one new realtek chipset in the linux kernel. https://lwn.net/Articles/705884/
Also... f2r is correct as usual.
> Again, you're talking about an opt-out. GPDR (the law) requires an opt-in.

It is opt-in. You decided to use a browser that implements the full HTML spec. Just use a basic browser.
It likely depends on the particularities of his contract, but my guess is that he couldn't be stopped from releasing a new podcast even if his contract explicity said he can't. Spotify would be hard-pressed to justify a non-compete when they fire him and pull his episodes down.

And his contract might very well include provisions covering exactly this sort of situation. No agent/lawyer worth their salt would let a public figure sign an exclusive deal that lets the company black list their client.

I doubt Spotify can pull him off their platform without breaching their end of the contract.
That is not happening for me.

This is all easy to solve if you get up early and then never stay up late.

I can't stay up late on Friday and Saturday, sleep in on Sunday and then expect to not have my sleep schedule altered to get up early during the week.

This is easy to do once you are old. If you are young with a social life I really have no idea.
For anyone else stumbling across this, sheldonbrown.com has a wealth of high-quality information about bicycles, and it's rare that I don't look there first.
I wouldn‘t send it to a printer (and certainly not generate the passphrase on a computer that is connected to the internet). Write by hand, it is only 12 to 24 words.
it was without question, one of your more brief, poignant pieces.
I think there's a misunderstanding here. If the customer mistypes the IBAN account number, the bank (website, app etc) will automatically reject it as invalid immediately, he won't have to deal with the customer service.
But then please share with me what the argument is? The user made a transfer that shouldn't have been done in the first place, and somehow people are saying that the protocol should have safe-guards against doing transfers to the wrong address, but how is the protocol supposed to know what address is right/wrong? There is literally no distinction between them, so therefore you need to allow any transfer, or no transfer.
I have literally zero clue as to how that ETH/WETH smart contract work but...

Why the heck did the guy not first did a test with 1 000 USD worth of coins instead of 500 000 USD? Once he sees everything is cool with 1 000 USD, he sends the rest. Sounds like 101 to me.
> A known problem with ERC-20 tokens is that transferring them to a contract that isn't made to access them is equivalent to burning them.

Is this a bug or a feature?
you could make some changes to the board, and it would all be addressable as 1M chip ram.

of course, the real fun was adding 4M of "fast ram" on the side bus.
So is the Sun.
>It's not government censorship, but it's still censorship.

No, it's free speech, not censorship. Freedom of association, choosing NOT to say something, to NOT spend your own (including your organization's own) private resources supporting something, and advocating others don't either, is itself integral to Free Speech. You can't support a specific stance without NOT supporting all the ones opposed to it. And the idea isn't just to howl into the wind, it's to convince the rest of us hooting apes about it too! Free Speech is inherently a social endeavor to convince other minds which will result in their altering their behavior (including how they allocate their personal resources and power). You don't need it alone on an island.

>Freedom of speech as a concept isn't just limited to the first amendment.

Actually it pretty much is, or at least is limited to the area of "force". The point of free speech is to keeping the seeking of truth and debates around values to the social and economic circles vs those of force. Because we simply cannot trust coercive force to not solidify things into very bad positions that then stick across broad swaths of the population. There has to be room for people to advocate against even broad consensus, if they believe it enough. But within those spheres it's open season, a constant ever shifting dynamic back and forth that never ends. Indeed making sure "it never ends" is the essence of free speech.

And just because even broad consensus can sometimes be wrong doesn't mean it's not often right. The people arguing against it may well be horrible people. Them being shunned, argued back against, and denied other people's support is Free Speech working 100% as intended. If they truly believe it they will just have to keep at it, and it may well take decades to shift society's overall views. They may fail, and it may be expensive. That's how it is. The point is that force can't be used to completely crush all potential to change minds.
It's the same as you and I agreeing on a contract where it says when you send me money, I will burn it. If you then use a bank transfer to me, it's not the bank's fault your money is gone, we agreed on that contract and it's not the bank's business to deal with that. Doesn't mean that there shouldn't be safeguards, there absolutely should be, but just laying out where the responsibilities start and stop and the whole deal with crypto currency is the absence of central control so if you choose to shoot yourself in the foot, you're free to do so. But freedom of action doesn't mean freedom of consequences and in the case of a blockchain, it's forever.
Great work. I've replaced several tires and every time it's the same ambiguous lookups followed by crossed fingers as I install the thing. I'm sure I'll use this page in the future
From my experience, the big bang rewrites for addressing tech debts or simplifying a complex system, doesn’t work for most. Break the large tech-debt/simplification goal into smaller milestones which roll up to a clean end state. Business won’t let you address large tech debt easily, as they don’t care about "your" tech debts. Tech debts must be address slowly but consistently in background. The chances of this working is higher IMO.
Interesting, but big companies aren't most companies, so I'll stand by my assertion that most businesses didn't see the relevance at that point.

There were only around 500 web servers globally by 1994.
You should have linked to this Wikipedia page instead: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet

But I guess you didn't, because that page states the internet was released to the public in 1989.
What bad actors? Since when is "argument" not effective? Who drowns the media in misinformation: normal people, or organizations?

Are you calling for an end to argumentation, and instead a resort to force? Are you saying Joe Rogan is a politically motivated misinformation source, intentionally trying to destabilize our society?
It’s more of a drinking club
But people are allowed to interact with smart contracts. To obtain the WETH he needed to do that. This is a "why do we even have that lever" kind of situation. If my brokerage had a "permanently burn all of your money" button then it wouldn't be reasonable to just say "well, people shouldn't push that button."

We can even see this with the criticism of wire fraud. Wire fraud is a huge fucking mess that occasionally costs people their life savings. The entire setup is rightly criticized (heck, even by the crypto community) for having users interact with a highly error-prone system with huge consequences.
Medical prices being inelastic (to the extent they are) has much more to do with medicare/medicaid/FDA regulations, govt & insurance allowable reimbursement rate lists, and costly govt requirements to even participate in a govt funded plan (like electronic medical records).

Proof? Services not typically covered, like plastic surgery or cosmetic dermatology. Clearly listed and even advertised prices for their services, openly discussed up front.

But if the govt reimbursement rate for an annual checkup is $x, why would anyone need to list that price up front, or have reason to ever charge any less?
Huh. What he's not talking about is QM, he's talking about the enormous math industry that built up around QM. Actual QM is experiments in labs with lasers and cryocooling. You can sit around with your complex amplitudes and fancy math but none of that is really necessary to appreciate or make forward progress in the actual underlying physics.

Sort of like string theory. Not exactly, but sort of.
Frankly Peikert shouldn't respond to such accusations. He should go to the IACR and Dan's department chair and take them up there. Most likely what he will do is continue the extensive discussion both parties have had on the PQC mailing list.

But of course the general public doesn't read the PQC mailing list: where the actual experts in this area communicate. And Dan knows this. That's why he posted this set of accusations on a blog that has a general audience, knowing full well that Peikert won't be able to defend himself to the same people.

When you say "If [Peikert] does not respond, he is being consciously and deliberately deceptive" you captured precisely the problem with writing this post: it makes a bunch of weak, unsupported allegations against Peikert in a forum where most readers can't judge the evidence and Peikert can't respond. It's incredibly dishonest -- and its a matter of public concern, since I believe Dan's post is consistent with a pattern of bullying and intimidation of researchers who criticize his NIST proposals on scientific grounds.
The author's main argument that it is okay for the standard library to be small is that you can pick an optimal(for you) implementation of functionality, and you can check licenses of code easily with cargo, library authors prefer to have autonomy, and you can lock in dependencies to a specific version.

I feel like the main advantage of a large standard library is already vetted reasonable default code. When using python I don't need to read through a billion blog posts and forums to find a good json library. There is a decent one already in the standard library and it basically works. If I need a better one, then I would want to go searching. I think having a sensible default out of the box helps more than it hurts. For the compile times, why would cargo make you pay for what you don't use?
Fair queueing makes a huge difference for a large percentage of traffic, and generally makes an AQM work better by better muxing packets.

I have a long list of things that can be done listed here:

http://www.taht.net/~d/broadcom_aug9_2018.pdf

A new one that has cropped up recently in terms of shortening queues, is rigorous application of the TCP_NOTSENT_LOWAT option, everywhere, but especially in containers.
> So if we're saying there is no reason goth or geek or whatever can't be considered gender

That's not what I said. There's a very good reasons why, as they usually exist, those cannot be considered genders, and I provided that reason.

There's no obvious logical (though there may be a practical) reason they couldn't not have the feature which makes them not genders, in which they could be genders, it's just that that doesn't actually happen. (Whether that's because of social inertia around gender categorizations or whether despite the label being a social construct there is some inherent human function of self-and-other gender categorizations which, even when one escapes socially imposed rigid binary stereotypes they still don't fit is...beyond the scope of what I am willing to stake a claim on.)
Also, in ten years you won’t know what to do with the 12 words because the application was abandoned and when you try to install it you get some error messages from npm about certain dependencies being deprecated.
> So we use a &'static str here instead of a C string so there are some changes to the C code.

> [..]

> So why does this type not support zero initialization? What do we have to change? Can zeroed not be used at all? Some of you might think that the answer is #[repr(C)] on the struct to force a C layout but that won't solve the problem.

The type of the first field was switched to a type (&str) that specifically promises it is never null. If the original type (a pointer) was kept, or a Option<&str> was used, mem::zero would've worked fine.
All of them on wifi… Imagine the utter hell of living in an apartment building surrounded by neighbours blasting every Hertz of the wifi-spectrum with hundreds of cheap devices.
I like putting 700x32 tires on my bike. Haven't issue attention to the other numbers. Are they mostly redundant? Guessing for a casual rider they don't have much of an impact?
I suspect you might start to receive a bunch of replies from people with the opposite experience (replies from people who find the syntax easy to read, and the compiler errors clear and understandable). I would like to attempt to preempt that by noting that it's totally reasonable for two people to feel drastically different things about a programming language. Neither view is more correct than the other.

That said, I am curious why different people have these different feelings. One aspect is likely rooted in the fact all of our brains are different. But I also wonder if first impressions play a big role here. A good example of a cryptic rust error is the `expected type Foo, but found type Foo` error message which is very inscrutable, especially to a new users. There are also some lifetime errors that can be hard to understand.

I wonder if someone encounters these type of messages very early on in their learning experiences, the unpleasantness of having to decipher them colors the rest of their learning experiences.
This is a really good case against crypto.

In the crypto case of this thread, the OP made a mistake and there's no process to fix it. 100K's lost. There's no avenue for recovery.

In the banking case of your link, the man made a mistake and was able to correct it, despite the bank working against him. 100K's lost and recovered.

In the case of the bank, it sure wasn't perfect and definitely should be better. But ultimately, the bank not only paid to recover the money, but the banking system (according to the article) is at least promising a fix for the underlying issue that a simple mistake in writing digits can lead to missending funds.

Also: crypto is touts its trustless nature as a positive. But note that trust is the lever Mr. Teich used to get Barclays to pay the cost of recovering the funds. Barclays only paid after their reputation was threatened, and of course, trust is based on reputation.
... is a carbon boondoggle whose only practical economic sourcing is fossil fuels.

Please don't foist green hydrogen fantasy propaganda in response, I've read it, it has no application in consumer transportation
Elaborating on the parent's info - the PE firm is Prosus, which is owned by Naspers.

Naspers is a South African conglomerate / investment firm that has been dabbling in tech investments for decades and started out initially in publishing a century ago. They bought 46.5% of Tencent in 2001 for something like $34 million.

They've gradually sold some of the Tencent and still hold around 1/3 of it. And now they're up to this:

"[May 2021] Prosus, the European-based technology listed subsidiary of South African giant Naspers, has bought 49.5% of its parent, in a move widely considered a means of moving the hugely valuable one-third stake of mobile giant Tencent from Africa into Europe. ... The Amsterdam-based Prosus would remain under Naspers control, through its controlling stake in Prosus, but both firms believe it will increase both of their valuations. Prosus is Europe’s largest internet company and believes this transaction will also double its free float to $100 billion, which it argues will increase its liquidity, market index weightings and trading dynamics."

https://www.forbes.com/sites/tobyshapshak/2021/05/13/prosus-...
They are now owned by Nokia.