skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
That is kind of a scary article. I tend to dislike crypto arguments that make it political. There are pure economic arguments against it, from free market laissez-faire Friedmanian perspective, from centrist perspective and more obviously from the left wing perspective, that show crypto as dangerous for society. No need to make it another wedge issue (I tried to be somewhat politically neutral here: https://benoitessiambre.com/specter.html ).

This article makes a fairly strong case that authoritarian politics could readily mix with the economics feeding on each other in an unstoppable vicious circle that eventually leads to financial and societal cataclysm.
Congress giving the EPA which is staffed by domain experts the ability to decide how much pollution is acceptable is a good thing actually. Why should congressmen be expected to figure that out?
Which is why federal government was designed to be extremely limited with the founding of the nation. Want change? Pass laws through congress.
Gold and bitcoin are practically identical.
Coinbase has been providing ICE with blockchain analytics tools
Show HN: Predictive ML model on encrypted data with Fully Homomorphic Encryption
> Everyone is an arse at one time or another.

sure, but publishing with hopes of going viral is a different animal altogether.

it was extremely poor judgement on the part of the employee that once again endangered everyone else's hard work.

assuming he doesn't go too viral, hopefully it will just be a lesson.
Working with git can become extremely complex if your workflow is bad.

Not git's fault, though.
Right, I'm not saying it's the right move for everyone. Just offering the alternate perspective.
If a geopolitical climate is too volatile for fiat to provide value, what good is it that crypto can isolate its stability (it can’t) if the humans who would use it have bigger problems than how to pay with money they already have in some form? Supply chains, physical force/warfare, climate, etc. If fiat is breaking down, there are surely bigger problems at play. How does solving the ability to transfer money solve the overall stability of the situation?

Per your example, ok Apple Pay got cut off. Is the transit system going to support crypto? Will they be able to run their business and make that transition with regulators? It’s a drastic measure that cuts one off from the structures that they physically exist in, and unless those structures are overall crypto-supportive, they would just be putting themselves further between a rock and hard place (which as we’ve seen by the lack of serious business adoption, companies and orgs are not really willing to take that risk in any meaningful way)

Edit: I agree with your use of the term “regime” and am not arguing against the sentiment of your point. Just that I don’t think crypto actually has the backbone to solve it, there’s not enough physical-world tie in yet for it to have the leverage it needs to truly overcome the global financial regimes that are neck-deep in fiat and physical assets that actually impact everyday peoples’ lives.
Dunno why you're being downvoted. This is the likeliest scenario; passing and ratifying an Amendment codifying Roe is next to impossible.
This guy isn't "sullying the brand" of anyone, he's complaining about living in a food desert in one of the richest cities in the world.

You have to be a certified idiot to think he's mocking the people patronizing or working at these bodegas.
They don’t even need to go full FOSS, they can just opt for source-availability to be a bit more competitive with Unreal Engine.

One of the things devs like about Unreal is that the entire codebase is just there to look at, so you can debug any bugs yourself and even add features to the engine that you specifically need for your game. Meanwhile Unity is a black-box blob that you can’t neither debug or extend, and all you can do is yelp in the bug tracker or the forums to get unnoticed.
> The companies who pay them aren't price sensitive, and they are locked in enough.

I doubt this is true lately. I have seen even more critical ticketing system like ServiceNow/Cherwell/Remedy getting replaced. We replaced Slack with other chat software because of licensing cost. Big companies are not price sensitive seems like old theory. Because I am seeing in so many large companies increasing license fee is causing replacement of existing products.
Recent history shows us many examples of SCOTUS saying "the Constitution doesn't let you do this", and people being up in arms crying "but the thing you just struck down is necessary".

Folks: it's not within the Court's authority to decide what is a good idea and what is a bad idea. Their sole job is to interpret laws through the lens of the Constitution. The justices may well agree with your wishes of what Congress could do, but they see that the current laws of our nation won't allow Congress to do it, or at least not in that way.

But even if you believe that a given law is good - that women should have an inalienable right to an abortion, or that there should be tight controls on who can carry a weapon, or whatever - you've got to recognize that sometimes the Constitution does not give the government the power to make that happen. In such events, you can't claim that the Court is corrupt because the justices won't recognize the important of what you value.

Rather, you have to recognize that it's become your moral duty to alter the laws of the land to allow for what you seek. The Constitution's Article V is there precisely for this reason. Granted, it's a really high bar to clear, but there is a built-in mechanism for fixing any such bugs that we find in the Constitution.
It’s a great book!
How much of the republicans apparent desire to drive climate change off the cliff can be explained by religion and belief in the end of the world? Apparently 40% of americans believe in imminent end of times: https://www.christianpost.com/news/poll-4-in-10-americans-be...
Have you compared passive IEMs to Apple's noise cancelling headphones? I compared Apple's products to properly inserted earplugs and Apple's ANC was better for low to medium frequency sound, so I wonder how you arrived at the opposite conclusion when it comes to IEMs
For many of us this is a welcome change, the roll back of the administrative state is very very much needed
>Congress deliberately leaves leeway in laws

This is the crux of the problem. The "Executive branch" is basically the cops. That leeway lets the cops invent law, prosecute you, and potentially imprison you. There's another case where the executive branch effectively acted as the legislator, cops, and the judicial branch (they prosecuted someone for a rule they created and found them guilty, all internally).

Congress needs to do these things, via simple and explicit laws that are clear and easy to understand. The role of the executive is _enforcement_, while the judicial arbitrates.
> In 20 years Matlab will be as legacy as Fortran is now, still some left but mostly forgone.

This is a joke, right?

In many academic disciplines that involve numerical work, the amount of Fortran code in use today greatly exceeds that of any of the rivals.

Professors were forced to use Fortran by their advisors when they were in school, so most of their code is in it. These professors are not going to allow their students to reinvent any wheels. And the cycle continues. To give you an idea of how extreme this phenomenon is - almost all the Fortran code out there in academia is still in Fortran 77.
It's not exactly new knowledge.
I love email & personally prefer it for communication, but there is an entire cohort of developers headed your way who rarely us it outside of "job-realated requirements".
Headlines about Supreme Court cases are almost uniformly misleading, because they suggest the Court is making decisions on policy issues rather than legal issues.

The very first words of the opinion, on p. 2, make clear that the legal issue before the Court is very different: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-1530_n758.pdf

The Clean Air Act does not purport to give the EPA blanket regulatory authority over anything involving emissions into the air. It has detailed provisions focused on reducing the amount of toxic pollutants, in particular through the use of control (scrubbing) technologies. This case concerns whether the EPA can use its power to impose control technologies on power plants, to force the industry to use a particular mix of power generation sources (solar, gas, etc.). The Court decided that the statute did not confer on the EPA the power to do that. The relevant discussion begins on page 16.

This decision gives legs to something that has been called the "major questions doctrine." The gist of that doctrine is that an agency can't stretch some pre-existing grant of Congressional authority to create sweeping regulations addressing a major new problem. As applied here, that means that the EPA can't rely on authority delegated by Congress to, for example, tell coal plants what kind of scrubbers they have to use, to tackle climate change. pp. 17-19.
Crypto was supposed to be inflation hedge but it is clearly not. It is a speculative market pure and simple.
This reminds me of what my chief legal council told me when I was negotiate a deal with another company for data services who we were really friendly with at the time. The gist: "Even if it is your best friend, you need to have very firm legal boundaries on what you are giving them access to as you don't know who will run the company or what their pressure points will be in the future and how they might use your data against your wishes".
I have had to have the same conversation with co-workers who have been developing for many years, but using tools like SVN, or similar Microsoft code repos that require a centralized repo.
Integrating blockchain-based digital IDs into daily life
> Do people agree that corporations should respect the customs and values of the local people when operating their business there?

No, definitely no. Corporations (especially american ones) know better. Corporations don't respect customs they respect growing value. /s
Textualism is just one of many excuses to rule the way you want to, as it leaves an immense amount of leeway to interpret.

A textualist reading of the First Amendment would permit the President to infringe free speech/religion/press etc. rights, as it says "Congress", and the "no law" bit would texutally forbid things like banning human sacrifice in religious ceremonies.

Textualists always find an out when they need one.
I don't see reordering comments except on Hacker News

Reddit's always in chronological order when I view it
> Cryptocurrency presupposes the existence of the internet.

Not really. You just need some way for nodes to communicate. That could happen over the Internet, or it could happen over mail, or it could happen over a team of ravens carrying transaction data on little scrolls (hell, given corvid intelligence, they might even be able to execute smart contracts in transit).
I thought we were talking about price stability.
if that's your goal, then we should be investing in nuclear energy

and putting more pressure on countries like China and India
OK, but that doesn't actually refute my central point, that Urbit is a cult. One of the hallmarks of cults is that they invent a private language that helps identify the in-group. Obviously I am not part of the in-group.

Scientology is famous for this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology_terminology
Some more ideas. Cold water holds more dissolved air in it than hot water, and the hot water heater would have recently rendered most of those gases out. That dissolved air could negatively impact the thermal conductivity of the water.

Near boiling water is about 4% less dense than near freezing water. If you filled the buckets right to the top, there would be less water in the hot bucket.
It is a very promising start on ML!
The dissent indicates the power is already explicitly granted in the EPA statute plain as day. It really isn't clear to me what language would satisfy the majority.
I suppose so. It still makes me cringe. It reminds me of all those scammy crypto projects that love to associate themselves with space for the perceived "cool factor". Like that superbowl commercial
No 4 year old ever pre-meditated a temper tantrum.

They may have learned it gets them what they want, but there’s probably a good reason they want that thing that can be explored abd they can be taught better ways of asking for what they want and need or dealing when they don’t get it.

They are not malicious
Issue is most such codes are written in C and C++. Also anything else usually lacks native multidimensional arrays, element-wise array operations, and parallel programming facilities, let alone raw performance.
> This is a public blockchain analytics service that has nothing to do with Coinbase's other services.

Are you familiar with the concept of parallel construction? It's a tactic LEOs use when they don't want to reveal how they actually obtained information. For instance, if they obtain information using method A, but want to conceal method A, they state that they actually obtained the information using method B (because the information actually is, after the fact, obtainable via method B as well, once you know what to look for).

In Coinbase's case the way this would work is Coinbase sources data from their internal databases (method A), and then after the fact they do let's say a Google search or some other public search for the names or whatever they found in their internal databases, and state that all data is sourced from online, publicly available data (method B).
The theme this session has been the court pushing lots of decisions back to congress, away from the executive, and away from the court itself.

For all the consternation, these decisions are very mutable. Congress just needs to pass laws.
> stuck in this hellscape

It looks much less so if you turn off the news. I have a good life here, and I'm unconvinced it would be a net improvement to move to Europe. I enjoy visiting there, but it's not like they don't have their own problems.
I just want my court to be consistent with multi-decade precedent and not dramatically pivot when the composition changes.
Markets and technologies will have to play the leading role.
And eventually a carbon tax.
Fun with DuckDB, Curl, and the Majestic Million
Inevitable at some point? At what point? If we are 500 years away from it does it make sense to invest resources in figuring it out now? It humans don't survive as a species is it really inevitable?

Another thing that most people don't get or don't want to acknowledge is that intelligence and consciousness is relative to the environment in which the entity is intelligent or conscious in. If you take a piece of software and expect it to be conscious the same way a human is conscious you're going to have a bad time. There is heavy heavy projection when it comes to humans interacting with basically everything. We anthropomorphize everything.

From that vantage point we will not be able to recognize intelligence and consciousness unless it look exactly as our own.
I've lived here in the US for 12 years and recently became a US Citizen. Coming from Ireland, to me the US is quite far from a functioning democracy. The democratic will of the people is not reflected in the make-up of congress, the courts, or three times in my lifetime - the Presidency (Clinton, W. Bush, and Trump were each elected by popular minorities).

Much of this is a result of the court's rulings (very directly in the case of Bush!), entrenching gerrymandering and making it harder and harder to remove the massively corrupting bribery for access that fuels the political system.

Deferring administrative decisions to congress is not a recipe for more democracy, but for more gridlock, and it hands a historically and internationally extremist faction the political victories they want anyway. It will generate Republican outcomes even from Democratic Party executives and congresses (like the current one).

That's not democracy.
If Democrats stormed the capital they would probably do an energy efficiency retrofit. HANG the chandeliers ... show them the LED ... lights.
Generally speaking, a Federal law would only be struck down if its intent or wording specifically violates a clause in the Constitution or its Amendments. So, it really depends on how its worded or what its intent is. I think it's pretty clear that Congress has the Constitutional authority to pass environmental regulations and could extend the EPA's mandates or legislatively codify EPA regulations such that they become law, because they have to do primarily with things which are commerce across state lines and national borders (e.g. where energy originates and where its expended are across borders).

Essentially the same justification for why Congress could create the EPA in the first place allows them to codify any regulations as law or to extend the EPA mandate. What cannot happen is the EPA unilaterally deciding to overreach its mandate, because its taking actions with the force of law but without any check/balance. The Constitution is quite clear that laws are the purview of the Legislative, not the Executive, and the EPA is a function of the Executive.
You are right. I'd say politically it is equally likely to have Jira replaced some places as it is not replaced in other places.
It's like with the priests: do what they say not what they do.
I don't know how you can say it's irrelevant. Multiple standards can exist concurrently. Not even because they deserve to, but because people like them and are comfortable with them even if they are or aren't a bit crappy.

Also the RP2040 is a great chip and it's super available and it's super cheap. And it runs Rust.
Good.

I have to say that, as an anti-authoritarian, conservative advocate of individual liberty, this last week has been extremely inspiring.

To those who are confused about how the system in the US works: the court has basically decreased their own power with some of these decisions. That’s the type of thing that should give everybody, regardless of affiliation, hope about the future.
Absent a strict law, congress could just make medicare funding or infrastructure or whatever dependent on abortion access, and every state would fold, just like with the drinking age.
Given the quality of the conversation on Reddit (top-voted memes calling Justice Barrett a handmaiden and so forth), HN is still a cut above :)
I couldn't understand the sample very well at all. It sounded muffled. If I were on a call with someone with that, I would ask if they are having audio issues.

edit: Yeah dude - your co-workers are being NICE man. I listened to it again. I am seriously telling you - that sounds really really bad and muffled. I can barely make out what you're saying. I'm spending more time trying to understand you than getting your drift.
Generally the ones I don't mind losing. If anyone can't figure out how to send a git pull request or patchset by email, I'm happy for them to email me with questions on how to, which I will answer as best I can.
Thanks for your input. I was looking for a comment from someone who had tried it out and reached a verdict.

To people who disagree and think it’s useful: I’m willing to listen - in fact I came here looking for your comments.

Please post a link to a useful service of app that Urbit provides now, that’s what many of us are waiting to see.
Fundamentally, why would someone buy a stock of a company that doesn’t eventually make a profit or offer some sort of dividend? Seems like Atlassian traded profit for staying power, but can they leverage that staying power to bring value to their investors?
> Earlier this month, authorities in Saudi Arabia seized rainbow-coloured toys and children’s clothing, which they claimed encourage homosexuality, according to state TV Al Ekhbariya. It said commerce ministry officials removed a range of items from shops in the capital, Riyadh, including hats, skirts, T-shirts, hair clips and pencil cases.

I swear it's always a moral panic/mass hysteria with these people when it comes to discussing controversial social issues.

They also seem to be very fixated and invested in the talking point that with the proper and right formula of marketing, you can convert straight people to gay people, or make them engage in homosexual activities which is quite absurd and ridiculous if you ask me but here we go again.
In hindsight, i didn't write into that comment as much merriment and cheer as I originally intended. This article contains many staples about this community which i find incredibly endearing, including focusing on a strange problem and trying to solve it with the most roundabout method.

I would disagree with you though on the 'DIY' nature of the article, it is certainly a creative solution but the author hasn't necessarily built anything.
The ESP32 wrover modules that come with 8M of PSRAM are pretty cost effective. 3-4$ in single part quantities is pretty good.
Well the fix here is for Congress to pass a specific law empowering the EPA with explicit authority.

If something like that can't make it through congress then it isn't democratic, and the task then becomes one of convincing the other side. I've the had the anti-coal conversation with plenty of conservatives and they were all open to my point of view.

Ultimately this court's decision is a win for democracy, even if it is a (temporary) step back for fighting climate change.
Government works off of law, not merely intentions. Intentions can change. Laws are documented. otherwise what’s the keep of random police officer from deciding that they have the ability to regulate the applications on my phone? After all, they’re just keeping me safe.
It would definitely be worth half its price as a reserve currency for purely industrial reasons, if not a bit more. Like if it became impossible to balance payments with it, well like if it became irradiated long-term like in Goldfinger, but there was still some clean gold left and it was just for industry. People would totally invent new uses for it at half the price. They just don't even consider it because it's expensive.
Nobody in the comments is saying that the Supreme Court is wrong in the sense that the logic doesn’t follow. Of course it’s nuanced and up to interpretation, that’s why most decisions are split — and usually split on “conservative (do what I say) and liberal (do what I mean).

The reason people are mad is because the court is relitigating long settled cases which breaks the main principle of the court which is don’t break userspace without damn good reason. We know they think the decisions were made incorrectly but the bar of “this is crucially important we fix” I don’t think it is being met. Instead it’s at best tone deaf to the real life effects of their decisions and more likely motivated to achieve specific partisan legislative outcomes.
Yes, and the dissent spells that out clearly. An excerpt from the dissent:

> The majority says it is simply “not plausible” that Congress enabled EPA to regulate power plants’ emissions through generation shift- ing. Ante, at 31. But that is just what Congress did when it broadly authorized EPA in Section 111 to select the “best system of emission reduction” for power plants. §7411(a)(1). The “best system” full stop—no ifs, ands, or buts of any kind relevant here.

They were given broad power by congress explicitly. If congress had wanted them to reign in that power or not choose the best system, then they could pull it back at any time. They did not. The court decided that the previous congress was full of idiots and could not fathom future technologies for emission reduction and therefore is moot.
Which is ironic since FDR most of the Court decisions were nakedly partisan in the other direction, massively expanding the power and scope of the federal government well beyond would should be constitutionally allowable
They lose half their revenue

https://s21.q4cdn.com/399680738/files/doc_financials/2022/q1...