skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Tech corporate change has slown down significantly, in as, the market is now full of entrenched players, and the market place is extremely static compared to 20+ years ago.

Plus, 20 years ago only a small number of people were on the internet compared to now.

Where did all of Google's, of Facebook's growth come from? An expanding internet.

That's over. US adoption rates went from basically single digits, to essentially everyone, over 15+ years.

Other places are even pulling away, or becoming more restrictive. EG, China, Russia, and even the EU slapping fines around.

Google, Facebook, the massive growth is over here, in their entrenched markets.

Meanwhile, more and more politicians grew up with the internet, use it daily, have smart phones, and "get" it.

EG, an early adopter at 18, in 2000, would be 40 now. And, adopters of tech at 30, in 2010, are 42 now!

During the rise of Google, eg 2000s, even the youngest Senators and Congress members were unaware of email, or the implications of smartphones, ad networks, tracking.

Now, they almost all use the Internet daily, see annoying banner ads, notice how they are tracked.

Further, some ... before entering politics, will experience the horrors of trying to deal with a real problem with Google, Facebook, and their lack of customer service.

My point is, it was not the speed of market change, but instead, that it was a new market.

That's over now. The tech market is old.
As usual, “just trust Amazon or Google” which is centrally owned, and not peer-to-peer (distributed/decentralized), and not an answer to my question.

> You're mentioning a .eth domain name being bought with cryptocurrency as an example, which is entirely circular. "Hurr durr, betcha can't swap one blockchain thing (.eth domain) for another blockchain thing (cryptocurrency tokens) without using a blockchain" isn't as strong an argument as you think it is. If we were talking about a .com domain name, no blockchain in the world will help you with that transaction.

Your argument feels in bad faith, but I’ll bite: “.eth” and ENS is a valuable construct for those transacting in the network. These assets do have clear market value, even if you personally feel they shouldn’t.
Look at basically any metric over the last 100 years and there will be an astonishing amount of improvement

- Extreme poverty

- Literacy

- Life expectancy

- Access to medicine

- #People living in democracies

- Access to clean water

- Access to food

- General standard of living

- Air quality

- ...

Meanwhile some people think (and others trying to make it look like) we're living in desperate times and are worse off than 50 years ago.
> Next thing, you'll see announced a platform for reusable container services that can be dynamically linked from other containers

I think that wouldn’t be a bad idea. It’s good for RAM and disk space usage while still isolating processes. Would be useful for IoT devices without much memory or space that still have to run docker.
This.

I'm surprised most sentiments on HN are "super cool" rather than "scary".

I guess some people prefer attention over privacy.
>I don't think protection against human-factor scams and frauds was ever a goal, you certainly never hear it as an argument.

Doesn't matter if "it was a goal".

It should have been a goal, and it's necessary (doesn't have to be perfect, but absolutely has to exist) for anything wanting to be used as a means of exchange in a modern economy, outside of Mad Max situations and speculation.

>Clearly people feel it is a price worth paying.

People felt that for smoking too. Then they didn't. And tons of people are just misinformed with Amway-style proselitization, and when they lose money without recourse they are surprised...
"But systemd is not some monolith"

It. Does. Not. Matter.

Still to much code in one place. Not enough review and unrelated subproject bitrot at different rate without visibility.
And we have ourselves a bagholder.
Off hand question. From which lisp did
I learn

(compress (reverse (explode 'ABC)))
==> 'CBA

I tried to google it, but I only found some shit I have written myself. First thing I did with my very own Symbolics-machine, was to implement explode & compress, because I did not want study those marvelous string-manipulating possibilities it may have.

Compress & Explode manipulate of list of numbers, of course. In my latest Brain-Fart production I think have finally solved all problems. List of numbers, whose first number is 34 aka \" , is printed as "string" in ppretty-printer and editor. No need to implement strings *EVER*.

https://github.com/timonoko/nokolis.py#readme
> What non-blockchain solution solves the double spend problem when transferring digital assets in a peer-to-peer network? Or, in the case of Ethereum, providing solutions to general-purpose decentralized computation and state (rather than only peer-to-peer payments) with such strong public consensus?

That question sounds like an XY problem.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XY_problem
- "This is enraging."

Lawsuits are a mediocre vehicle for channeling rage.

Realistically (though I'm no lawyer), the $25,000 they've already accepted is far more than a court would plausibly award them, for the tangible damage of half a day's downtime on GitHub.
> I'm not interested in placing bets on my salary

That's exactly what you already do if you're renting: you're betting that you will be able to work and earn enough salary to afford the rent, with your adjusted expenses. That's "pfft easy" when you're in 20's, easy in your 30's, okay in your 40's (kids need money, yo), doable in your 50's, oh shit when you're 52 because surprise! economic downturn / medical emergency / anything else that might happen. And now you don't have a place to live in and spending your retirement money to rent one, or take a dip in your quality of life.

If you're not paying for your mortgage, you're likely paying for one of your landlord.
Maybe the SAAS company(ies) also deals with the branding of the swag? Or just all companies buy from the same suppliers
How is this not a theft? (well, the law just was made up for this...that is not the question. Im puzzled on the principled law, moral and ethics argument trying to justify this, and whether implications were considered?). This is in my view a short-sighted, non-principled, purely emotional decision which, however, destroys the very foundations (globally) of individual-property rights on which modern western society (especially in the US) stands.

Such virtue signaling move by the US is projecting incredible one sided double standard (in absolute terms, not in relative to any other nation). Are these lawmakers aware of the un-intended consequences? or are they intended infact ? (Something the for instance P. Zeihan has be ranting about for a while -- de-globalization and US increasingly isolationist policies?)
With cash that limitation exists because there isn't really an alternative. That doesn't mean we should use it as example, being able to undo mistakes is a valuable feature. That's also one of the reasons most online accounts aren't E2E-encrypted, most people prefer having a way to reset their password/key over losing all access to data.
Yes, and if it was promoted as a "decentralized ledger of transactions" it would be fine and almost no one would have heard of it. But it's often aggressively promoted as a replacement for traditional currencies and banking with many benefits over the old-fashioned models, ignoring the fact that those models account for many issues that blockchain does not. There's a reason banks and economies evolved in the way they did.
Another trap with macros is that they might introduce extremely hard to detect bugs. You macro for clearing a bit like for example:

#define CLEARBIT(a,p) = ((a) &= ~(1 << (p)))

might not work correctly if your datatype is something "exotic" like a long. An inlined function might be the better choice.

Otherwise you would need to define specific macros again:

#define CLEARBITLONG(a,p) = ((a) &= ~(1L << (p)))

These bugs can steal hours of your time, especially on embedded systems where debugging is less accessible.
If both assets are defined by the same blockchain protocol, a contract can be written that provides both users the ability to deposit the two assets into it. Only once both assets have been deposited will the atomic swap occur. And at any point before this, a deposit could be safely withdrawn (ie: if other party backs out of deal).

Edit: if your question is “how does this technically look in practice”, here is an example: [1]

[1] https://github.com/niftyhorde/swap.kiwi/blob/master/contract...
What was the quality of life improvement in tracking water intake? I find it interesting, because your body tracks it whether you want to or not, and I never found forcing myself to drink more water beneficial.
Paraphrasing the FAQ, repeats are tolerated if they are (a) appropriate to the site, (b) not yet attracted much discussion, and (c) enough time has elapsed to give a new audience time to see it again.
What does the Russian president have to do with anything in that context?
Learning electronics does not have to take up much space. You can learn a fair amount with a home lab that fits into a desk drawer and you only need about a square meter of desk space while working.

Lots of people like setting up sprawling labs, but there are a few things to keep in mind:

Parts drawers are an incredibly inefficient way to store components. I picked up a few kits of basic components (resistors, capacitors, LEDs) that come in small compartmentalized containers, then stuck those containers and a few loose parts (breadboards, perfboards, small spools of wire) into a cookie tin.

You only need a small collection of hand tools like wire cutters, wire strippers, a soldering iron, and a multimeter. I even have a small digital oscilloscope/signal generator that hooks up to a computer and is about the size of a multimeter.

Modern microcontroller development boards are a huge space saver. They are compact, easy to repurpose for each project, and remove the need for other equipment in most cases (e.g. they provide rudimentary ADCs/DACs and can power for low power projects).

While there will be limits, the biggest hurdle will be self-restraint.
General comment about theoretical systems like Lacanianism.

They seem to have these common features:

1) They are self-contained systems. They may be interesting in the terms of sci-fi worldbuilding, but you must suppress critical thinking and just absorb them or they fall apart.

2) Experts tend to discuss in the terms of what the founder or important figures meant. Understanding the subject is interpreting what few people said and thought. Right and wrong is about right interpretation.

3) Advance happens by forking or dissolving into smaller groups with different interpretations. There are main divisions, sub divisions, and so on.

I find hard to understand these kind of systems. There may be some initial core ideas that are interesting to ponder, but building whole system seems very limited and dogmatic.

If there is no way to create synthesis or settle questions among experts who disagree, and the only way is to branch, is there anything there?

--

edit:

My null hypothesis for the effectiveness of psychoanalysis and psychotherapy in clinical setting is that the theory or method is just a framework that

A) helps analysts and patients that understand and work well together to find each other. Like Trekkie getting into therapy with a Trekkie fan therapist, or a Chatholic patient having therapist with Catholic backround.

B) it gives some needed structure, the theoretical framework itself is not that important.

C) the real help comes from interacting and talking with a person intimately.

In this sense, anything goes as long as it's not outright harmful.
You don't even need a lab for this. You can solder fine on a computer desk and create custom PCBs using software, then send it off to a company to etch it for you.
I work in government (partially improving our use and creation of free and open source software) and I think there are a few different psychologies:

1) there are people who understand f/oss. Sometimes they are in power and choose it for the projects they oversee. This is small, but growing slowly.
2) there are people who don’t understand and the default is to do what their contractor says. This is huge and probably stable.
3) there are people who understand and don’t like it because of the lack of formal support and the chaos and perceived unpredictability. This is the “buy Microsoft/IBM and they will support you” group. This is large but shrinking a little.
4) there are contractors who don’t want the risk to their contracts being renewed from competitors seeing their code and being able to support. Obviously no feds in this group, but lots of feds are influenced by their contractor and take on their position. This irks me the most because its acting in the contractors benefit to the government’s detriment. I don’t understand how people in oversight positions take this position in good faith.
5) there are contractors who have IP and want to resell or reconfigure for multiple clients and would raise their bid price if they had to release under f/oss. Again, not feds, but this is a perceived fear of people with set budgets who want to get best value and their incumbent contractors are saying it’s more expensive if they have to do f/oss.

I’m probably missing some of the tech workers. But I think the biggest blocker is contractors as probably 95% of actual hands on work is done by contractors. Some perpetual who have been in place for decades. Even when the companies change, the individuals stay the same.
> It will eventually get in. You will eventually lose control

This is has been happening in Australia since January. We've essentially removed all restrictions at this point, and we're letting covid do its thing. I think we've had more covid deaths this year than we had in 2020 and 2021 combined.

The difference that delaying made is that we're only "letting it rip" after 85% or so of our population is fully vaccinated. (Everyone who wants a vaccine has one.) And the vaccines are a really big deal - they have a massive dampening effect on covid's mortality rate.

> The death toll will eventually be the same regardless.

We'll see, but I doubt it.
Not sure that holds. By that logic, Bitcoin (based on the idea of an anonymous dude no longer contactable) and Ethereum (which has split into Ethereum and Ethereum classic and has a documented history of going back on things that have been promised) are out.

Can you be a bit more specific about what it means to "choose the team" according to best practices?
Are the Great Lakes really inland seas?
How do you tie real world tomatoes to NFT tomatoes? Who verifies this? How do you tie an NFT of a grassfed chicken to a real world grassfed chicken? Who verifies these chickens are actually grass fed?
> Literally any trusted central authority or database.

But they said peer-to-peer network.
This 1854 article from The Economist makes an interesting comparison.

https://twitter.com/DecodingTrolls/status/151315347814676480...

I've been trying to follow the battlefield progress of the war, and there are very few articles out there by analysts who are expert on military operations and the specifics of Russian and Ukrainian goals/capabilities. The current article has a few good quotes but also offers some cringeworthy judgments.
"This is not necessarily a flaw in technology".

When is the last time you needed to debug the contract when you buy coffee?
It doesn’t need to be spread out to have an effect. If the investments are concentrated in cities, that raises the price of housing in the surrounding areas as there is more demand for rural properties from city residents trying to escape the higher prices.

Anecdotally, I’m seeing crazy numbers for “average” houses in the small towns surrounding the DFW metroplex. Hell, the house my parents built in 2006 for $140k is now selling for $350k. 1200 sqft mass produced trac home.

But it’s an hour drive to downtown Dallas (less if no traffic) so plenty of people are commuting but making city salaries. It’s the same in every city across America.
> “trust in institutions controlled by humans and bound by established laws and rules is instead replaced — by unconditional trust in the infallibility of code“

No, it’s not just trust in code, you’re also trusting the people that wrote the crypto coin client apps and operate the crypto exchanges. Sketchy crypto apps and exchanges already have made off with clients’ coins. That’s not a blockchain vulnerability, rather that’s a vulnerability in every market where you transact through brokers - you’re implicitly trusting your brokers.

A Blockchain is just a linked list of records with accumulative crypto signatures, which gives a you a crypto-verifiable indelible ledger. To make it a trusted financial ledger you just need to have trust in everyone involved between the finance clients and the ledger.
>Blockchain is just a decentralized ledger of transactions. A cryptocurrency is an implementation of digital currency using a blockchain. Blaming blockchain for not having fraud prevention tech is like blaming TCP/IP stack for delivering a scam email to your inbox.

It's more like blaming a water utility company that doesn't give potable water, and its supporters tell you "but you can always buy a bottle of water from the store. Or maybe dig for water yourself!".

Yes, one can build the "fraud prevention" and other measures on top of blockchain. But then you have a financial institution just like a bank, and you can drop the blockchain part - anything it "solves" can be solved much simpler and with 1000x less energy once you have the other trappings of a financial institution.
Most people don't do the math and realize that over a long enough time horizon a 30 year fixed mortgage will cost you less than purchasing the home outright. This assumes you take the money you would have sunk into the home and instead invest it at a higher rate of return, which is an option available to most home owners.
And you've set yourself up for an answer;)

I think any adversarial system has something to gain from blockchain. When participants of a system are naturally pitted against one another due to being competitors (a la engaging in a zero-sum game), the solution is usually to agree to auditing by a third-party. However, this method is easily corruptible by replacing the auditors with biased parties[1]. This is not an uncommon problem. Try searching "biased auditors", and you'll get a wealth of literature and perspectives on the issue.

A lot of blockchain proponents are majorly against the idea of "private blockchains", but I'm not. I believe private blockchains hold a lot of promise as a way of auditing an adversarial system, in place of a corruptible third-party. Plus, auditors don't amount to much more than middle-men, and thus add an additional layer of complexity to the system, meaning more can go wrong. Redirecting the cost of auditors to maintaining a system hosted by the adversaries would result in a more lean system (by less nodes) with little chance of bias corrupting the audit process (because you can't inject former employees into a blockchain). Instead of the SEC having to oversee both the members of the network and the auditors to prevent trusts from forming, they would just need to monitor the blockchain updates.

What the technical implementation of this would look like would vary wildly by industry, and thus would require some brainstorming to ensure feasibility, but no such brainstorming would ever begin if the members of an adversarial system are convinced that blockchains are "dangerous nonsense".

Of course, such a technology would take a massive chunk from a very profitable industry, so I expect a lot of people (employed auditors) to be averse to the idea, but maybe those people need to do some soul-searching. When your job depends on the continued existence of a problem, you aren't really incentivized to diminish the problem. Rape-whistle companies sell less rape-whistles if people rape less.

[1] https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/ernst-young-auditors-to-pay-...
I'd say it's highly questionable that this can be achieved in a reasonable timeframe, if at all. And millions suffer from easily solvable software problems (no communication, no testing and ground research, greed, bad ux), while you chase some current CS buzzword of the year that would win the assignment (AI, blockchain now, chatbots, VR before).
You're right, sorry. Most typos should be fixed now. I made the translation into English in a rush and didn't think of running it through a spellcheck beforehand. Thanks for reminding me!
By that logic isn't all abstraction 'declarative code'?
Then better to find the thing that energizes you. For me it is getting to know a good framework like NextJS and working on small solo projects. For me it is not writing books … I find it fairly tedious. Nor is it the typical day job of old
complicated codebased and small
incremental improvements on big established software products.
Think of this like Plausible meets Google Analytics. Feedback welcome.
Maybe in US. In Europe people pay a lot with money transfer and payments are considered to be mostly irreversible. Banks don't take responsibility for your mistakes (like typos or getting scammed).
Trying to sign this, I got a 429 "too many requests" when clicking on confirm, and something about 20 per 1 hour. Did I sign, or didn't I? Reloading the page tells me there's no pending confirmation ID.
Please use the direct link from the journal. Researchgate forces one to register before download:

https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.33...
Not a pilot but I assume the co-pilot was doing the wrong thing here?
They've decomissioned a fair few and lost 47 (iirc) due to solar storm
Bitcoin has two innovations in my view:

1. Technological innovation: distributed ledger with trust-less consensus. However, that innovation is largely unnecessary for almost all practical purposes, and it leads to resource use that is about a billion times higher than without that innovation (due to duplicated work and Proof of Waste).

2. Legal/process/social innovation: circumvention of rules and regulations, like Uber. Some people love that innovation, some people think it is rather harmful.

Personally, I think encrypted and uncensorable flow of information is a net positive, and should be retained. Encrypted and uncensorable flow of money, not so sure.
Proposed methods:

- Dry sauna

- Testosterone

- Vitamin D

- Goals and purpose

- Be around people

Minor points:

- Fruits & Vegetables

- No alcohol or weed

- Good sleep

- The power of believing you can be happy