skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This is totally overthinking it.

Google is making money hand over fist from so many different angles that they can simply afford to.

Google Play makes them more profit than some major phone manufacturers do off all their devices sold.

So if there are engineers at Google who are willing to own something like getting high quality Chromebook support in the larger Linux ecosystem, the money is there.

Compare that to traditional phone manufacturers that are:

- reluctant to spend a single dime where they don't have to

- actually benefit from obsolete devices

- have trouble attracting in-house talent causing them to outsource work in a way that is not conducive to high quality upstream-able code...

At the end of the day it's money.
There's always a more ignorant user. I don't find this argument persuasive. The non-filesystem-centric data storage systems I'm familiar with are far worse. Instead of portable files which you can do with as you please, you're confined to preconceived integrations that developers thought of, like iPhone apps that let you "share" information with other apps.
Comparing Apple Silicon and x86 as the difference between having modern plumbing or not...not exactly where I expected the review to go! Gruber's hyperboles can be entertaining for sure.

But damn, I can't wait for the time for me to upgrade my Intel Macs.
Unsafe Syntax
Something like Photoshop/Gimp panels I guess.
Aha! That changes everything again!

You can create the transaction hash on as many untrusted machines as you like. To make sure the hash represents the correct transaction.

Then you can enter only the hash into the hardware wallet.

That solves the problem of how to operate an air gapped hardware wallet!

I think this also does away with the "wallet publishes your seed via nonces" problem? I would hope signing the transaction hash is deterministic?
I’m not sure what “shortcuts” the author is referring, but perhaps…

x = y || z # if y is falsy x = z

x = f ? y : z # ternary operator

%w{one two three} # array of words

And so on.
In Australia, Telstra made all calls free and operate a wireless network for all broadband customers. Free calls goes some way to stopping the vandalism problem.

Otherwise they are advertising space. I think the US pay phones are too small to accommodate advertisements.
QR can have ECC turned off so there can't be any hidden information. Of course, it makes it more susceptible to errors.
Guile was afaik, until it wasn't anymore and they went with Vala instead, though I can't remember when that happened.
Having come from an ordinary well off family and studied at elite institution X, this account reads as surprisingly consistent with my experiences, despite my evident differences with it's author.

In these environments I was always surprised by how much of what people said and did was a show and how inaccessible their true thinking was. Friendliness was just another commodity or marketing tool. The arrogance is not always well concealed and it's what tends to give away the falsity of many interactions.

If for whatever reason one winds up in more intimate social settings with these folk, some of them turn out to be wonderful people, talented and creative and open, but many turn out to be predatory pirates, looking to take from the rest of us what they think is their right. Some of the former eventually morph into the latter as the social environment in which they operate teaches such behavior is virtuous.
Some years ago I was privileged to give a Mary Shelley Halloween
Lecture at her house in Dorset (now converted into a Shelley Theatre).

We had a Computer Fright Night: Are digital monsters real?

Never before (or since) have I enjoyed such a strong connection with
an audience tackling complex issues of digital harms through a
literary lens.

So much of the pre-digital science fiction from authors like Shelley,
Wells, and Forster is powerful and appropriate for understanding our
situation today. Shelley herself is a complex character and her own
connection to writing science fiction can help understand our hopes
and disappointments/betrayals of technology.
There seems to be a conspicuous lack of PC platform OSs.
Even though the terms are related, I did not talk about "risk" but about "trust".

If you think there is no way around trusting some party, then please name which party that would be. And why one cannot use Bitcoin without trusting them.
>In older societies, everyone is aware of their class [...], but in America they seem to pretend that class doesn't exist there

Americans aren't pretending because unlike England, the country itself was created without a monarchy handing out titles of nobility[1]. Europeans can trace deep historical bloodlines -- which further reinforces class distinctions and self-awareness across generations. However, America was built on immigrants arriving on ships where family records were lost.

So if one still insists on overlaying the word "classes" on top of America, it is very different from "class" in Europe. Therefore, social class in America is more about wealth rather than hereditary titles. The ability for money (e.g. become a millionaire/billionaire) to change your status in society means social class in the USA is fluid and can change.

Maybe a loose USA version of hereditary class might be families like Kennedys, Bushes, etc where the media nicknames the Kennedys "Camelot". Even so, a bricklayer who was the son of an Austrian village policeman and had a bloodline tainted by a bastard great-grandfather -- was able to marry into the Kennedy family. Why? Because Arnold Schwarzenegger became a successful multi-millionaire. The European-version of "lower class" in Arnold's family background wasn't a barrier in the USA.

>Everyone pretends that racism in America is just that, when it's actually classism born of racist roots

I think many do have pure and simple racism based on skin color. E.g. they don't care for black billionaires like Michael Jordan and they think it's wrong that a black judge sits on the Supreme Court. Yes, racism for some people may be (subconsciously) intertwined with class as you point out ... but for others, it's a simple dislike of black people.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peerages_in_the_United_Kingdom
Any examples? I always found it easy to grok but I'm not at a very high level so I'm curious where it gets hairy.
Huh? So people who can't sleep or feel uncomfortable without their evening beer aren't addicted, only because final stage alcoholism is a nightmare? Or alcoholism != alcohol addiction?

I didn't know what uncontrollable drinking is a necessity to diagnose alcoholism, but I'm luckily not involved in the topic. Do you have a reference to back that up?
> In 70 A.D., Vespasian ordered the construction of the new amphitheater in the city center [on the site of Nero’s estate, Domus Aurea, which featured an artificial lake and a 98-foot bronze statue of himself, the Colossus of Nero ...] It was also an innovative architectural and engineering wonder, the largest and most complex permanent amphitheater of the ancient world. Made primarily of concrete, 3.5 million cubic feet [100,000 cubic meters] of travertine, and similar amounts of marble, stone and timber, the Colosseum rose to 157 feet [50 meters] (roughly the height of a 15-story building), with capacity for an estimated 50,000 to 80,000 people [... with] four entrances for the political and religious leaders and 76 for the ordinary citizens [...] The Colosseum’s greatest innovation, says Nathan Elkins [deputy director of the American Numismatic Society and author of 'Monument to Dynasty and Death: The Story of Rome’s Colosseum and the Emperors Who Built It'], was its use of concrete

> Gladiators, animals and soldiers, who engaged in all types of combat within the Colosseum, were transported from the understructure of the arena via a complex system of lifts, trap doors and pulleys. The amphitheater could even be flooded to allow naval reenactments to take place [...] It featured other innovations as well, including a sophisticated drainage system used to siphon off water used to stage mock sea battles in the arena. Sailors were employed to operate an overhead retractable awning, which could be rolled out to protect spectators from rain or Rome’s blistering heat. The complex network of chambers and tunnels beneath the arena floor, called the hypogeum, housed props, scenery and participants when not in action. And the amphitheater’s ingenious system of trap doors, pulleys and lifts facilitated dramatic entrances for scenery and combatants alike, allowing even elephants to appear as if from nowhere

> the Colosseum is also the father of all modern outdoor sports stadiums. The Colosseum’s use of arches to support the structure, the elliptical shape and the organizational system used to control the entry and exit of fans based on the location of their seats are staples of most modern stadiums

It seems that the book is freely available at academia.edu :

https://www.academia.edu/40177511/N_T_Elkins_A_Monument_to_D...
You've missed step 0 (and earlier): how did you trustlessly obtain the bitcoin in the first place? Your options aren't good here:

a) Buy it on an exchange: You need to trust that the exchange won't just run off with/sell your real money/credit card details (but at least in the real world you have a chance of clawing back stolen cash)

b) Buy it via a service like localbitcoins, where you meet a stranger in an alley and hand them hard cash. Not very trustless!

c) Mine the coins yourself. But unless you build a bitcoin miner from scratch, you need to trust the hardware and software (how do you know for sure that it isn't mining to someone else's account?) And your miner needs to be connected to the internet, so hackers could get your coins.

There are no good trustless options. You have to accept some risk.

EDIT: I missed the only tried and true trustless way to get bitcoins:

d) Hack/phish/con someone else out of their bitcoins!
I loathe most shortcuts: too many things to remember and usually cryptic syntax. Maybe that's because I have to be a polyglot developer (Elixir, JavaScript, Ruby, Python) and I can't remember all the tiny details of each language.

If you want to give a try to Ruby, get to understand blocks quickly. Instead of

for item in list:
work_on(item)

which would work (with a closing end and no : ), the idiomatic way is

list.each do |item|
work_on(item)
end

or the one liner

list.each {|item| work_on(item)}

Check also map, select, each_with_index, each_with_object, etc. Blocks are fundamental to Ruby for reason that only practice can tell.
How is it misleading? The entire post reads like a PR piece for their company, but the title seems faithful.
Lotta CPU time spent to get you that nil.

One would think you could just `(defun fun () nil)`.
You can obtain them via as many small transactions as you like. Never trusting anyone with more than the transaction amount.
> Holy shit this thing badly needs both an editor and a tl;dr.

I noticed the size of my scrollbar and thought to myself "oh this will be the typical dieting blog post that is 10% blog post and 90% comment section with every Dick and Harry writing about their own personal experience".

Nope, it's all blog post. Sheesh!
The other 4 Earth Lagrange points are unsuitable for various reasons:

L1: between the Sun and the Earth. The Sun reflecting off the Earth would interfere with instruments.

L3: This is suitable for positioning but impractical because of distance from a communication and perspective.

L4 & L5: these are unsuitable because they're stable. Distance is an issue too. Why are stable Lagrange points unsuitable? Because things tend to collect there. Over the eons a whole bunch of crap has built up there and will continue to do so. That's not what you want when dealing with sensitive instuments.

Now you could say that you could orbit L4 or L5 like JWST orbits L2 and that's true but you still expend energy for stationkeeping. At L2 you spend energy to stay around the L2 point. At L4 and L5 you spend energy to avoid falling into the Lagrange point.

According to [1][2] it's more expensive (in delta-V terms) to get to L4/L5 than L2 but not hugely so.

[1]: https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/27010/how-does-the...

[2]: https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/57463/what-is-the-...
Or are you anti-social because you can't fit in in the social hierarchy?
I think you're mixing up syntax and semantics. Function calls that return void are usually better classified semantically as procedures, at least when trying to understand how the program is arranged.
I get the joke, but it's two statements, not one. (while and ;)
U.S. policy on China tech and chips
Really hope x86 virtualization/translation gets better. Love the battery life and snappiness of the 16inch model I have from work but docker and other stuff I need daily to work on x86 projects is worse than on my 2015 Razer laptop.

I really would love to pick up an air for personal use though and just ssh/vnc into my Linux machines remotely
In that case -- I definitely agree Ruby usually gets out of way. It's often my go to for hacking on something, unless it's data science-y.

I'll mention: implicit returns, return if, and safe navigation, the &. operator. Ruby's newer pattern matching features are really cool[1], especially for things like JSON structures, but I've only use started using them. Classes are also super easy to extend.

Many of these things are also incredibly easy to abuse - but they have their places.

[1]: https://docs.ruby-lang.org/en/3.0/syntax/pattern_matching_rd...
i can provably determine whenever someone in my household is using youtube. We have "fixed wireless" as primary internet access right now, and the upstream is measurably between 300 and 800 kilobits. However, the "router" assumes perfect connection (which i am guessing is somewhere around 5mbit) so any sort of QOS is out the window. And it's behind CGNAT, so i'm getting a class C on a class A private network, and all gaming stuff that doesn't like NAT to begin with balks. I've worked around that (check my github or whatever), but the fact remains, without literal triple-NAT my household can't actually use the internet as it exists, even with potentially 40mbit downstream speeds.
See how many times you GitHub release was downloaded
Not everyone aims to be wealthy. Most companies do pay a decent salary (specially in europe) with good work life balance. High paying jobs often correlates with high stakes which means potentially higher level of stress.
For me there wasn't ever question of "How?" only "Why?".

One time I landed on Ruby project and I didn't have any trouble fixing bugs and implementing minor functionalities without really learning Ruby only knowing some Python.
When I looked at Ruby (admittedly a long time ago now) everything was 10 minute videos. Is there any actual useful material on it now?
>Rob Pike famously explained that C needed its space-insensitive braces and semicolons in case code was transmitted through a channel that mangled whitespace.

But did he explain why it used semicolons, rather than periods, which would make more sense because a statement is basically a sentence?
Programmers are lemons. See Akerlof:

https://personal.utdallas.edu/~nina.baranchuk/Fin7310/papers... (PDF) (LibGen: https://libgen.rs/scimag/10.2307%2F1879431)

Discussion: https://policonomics.com/the-market-for-lemons/

Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Market_for_Lemons

Dan Luu's take, "Developer hiring and the market for lemons" (2016) http://danluu.com/hiring-lemons/

Discussed in 2016 (378 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12671290 and 2018 (119 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16833853

Numerous other takes on "market for lemons" w/in HN: https://hn.algolia.com/?q=market%20for%20lemons

In my view, understanding the Market for Lemons dynamic, and Adam Smith's five factors determining wage compensation are the most useful economic tools an IC knowledge worker can have.

Smith:

The five following are the principal circumstances which, so far as I have been able to observe, make up for a small pecuniary gain in some employments, and counter-balance a great one in others: first, the agreeableness or disagreeableness of the employments themselves; secondly, the easiness and cheapness, or the difficulty and expense of learning them; thirdly, the constancy or inconstancy of employment in them; fourthly, the small or great trust which must be reposed in those who exercise them; and fifthly, the probability or improbability of success in them.

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Wealth_of_Nations/Book_I/...
What does this mean, concretely speaking? Do you mean you can't remember the right syntax when trying to program in it?

I know its syntax is complicated but I never felt this has caused me trouble. I guess writing a parser for it would be extremely hard, but that's another story.
> Whatever decisions Lucas and Rowling and Martin made regarding the integrity of their work, they were tempered by the need to ensure their properties were also profitable. Conventional wisdom says that’s how you build brand recognition. But Watterson stands apart from his fellow creators because he rejected that wisdom. Which ironically has led to the exact thing Watterson didn’t want… the creation of a brand identity.

This is a misunderstanding of what Watterson was (is!) trying to achieve. He wants Calvin and Hobbes to exist on its own terms. You can call that a "brand identity" if you like, but it is certainly very deliberate on Watterson's part. What he is really trying to avoid is taking away the experience of reading the comic strip by having to make elements of it too concrete: What Calvin's or Hobbes' voices sound like, making the fuzzy line between Calvin's imagination of Hobbes and the real world too clear, etc. This isn't speculation, you can read this in the 10th anniversary Calvin and Hobbes book, which has a lot of great commentary.

As for how he was able to financially justify this, you can read about it in his commencement speech at his alma mater of Kenyon College, which I highly recommend reading in its entirety [1].

> Creating a life that reflects your values and satisfies your soul is a rare achievement. In a culture that relentlessly promotes avarice and excess as the good life, a person happy doing his own work is usually considered an eccentric, if not a subversive. Ambition is only understood if it's to rise to the top of some imaginary ladder of success. Someone who takes an undemanding job because it affords him the time to pursue other interests and activities is considered a flake. A person who abandons a career in order to stay home and raise children is considered not to be living up to his potential-as if a job title and salary are the sole measure of human worth.
You'll be told in a hundred ways, some subtle and some not, to keep climbing, and never be satisfied with where you are, who you are, and what you're doing. There are a million ways to sell yourself out, and I guarantee you'll hear about them.

It's funny to me that all these years later, Watterson is still seen as some mysterious recluse with obscure motivations, when it couldn't be more clear: Watterson does not want to compromise his artistic vision, and he does not need more money than he already has in order to live a life he is content with. So there is no reason for him to milk Calvin and Hobbes for all it's worth.

[1] https://web.mit.edu/jmorzins/www/C-H-speech.html
Is the company still around? What is everyone doing nowadays?
Fencing tokens might be fine to prevent data corruption but they don't suffice to guarantee mutual exclusion.

For instance, if you need to deal with an external API and you need to avoid the same request going out twice and you have logic that could in theory lead to that, e.g. via concurrent retry mechanisms, at least once semantics, etc.

What's the solution for ensuring code execution under mutual exclusion in a distributed system?
That’s not what the article is talking about. When I was growing up (mid 90’s) and earlier, ANY commercial success was selling out. Playing your guitar at the local cafe? Awesome. Signing your first album deal? You’re selling out, man.

It was a weird remembrance of the punk movement, and maybe counterculture before it, where basically any capitalist interaction was working with The Man and considered selling out.
I have read his comics since my childhood and I have no idea why I always assumed throughout my 25 year existence that Mr. Bill Watterson was history. I found out "NOW" that he is well alive and kicking and lives in solitude, away from public eye. It feels so weird thinking a man is dead for your whole childhood years only to be alive this whole time, I feel like crying right now.
They didn't delete a part of container, they deleted a part of the docker file. Actually removing data from already built container image, as title suggests, would be much more impressive.
Media Streaming with ReactPHP
That minimizes risk, but trust is still involved.
I remember it, in the moment, being immensely frustrating. I couldn't get any useful work done because everything went through the horrible mangling process and I was powerless to change it.

If it was mere cluelessness and I could have introduced a bit of sane process to the project I think I'd have had a blast!
Turns out it was not built to handle the load of a "frontpage of hackernews" situation, hehe.
I think it should be comical, because that makes it more entertaining. The sub is more boring because it's more serious sounding. I also don't see why it needs to be like how normal people talk, because it's literally a cartoon. Generally I far prefer the English dub style to the stern and serious Japanese sub style
Also:

x ||= 1
x &&= 1

and the various built-in methods from Array, Hash, Enumerable, String etc.
Why is this relevant? It doesn’t matter how OP obtained their bitcoins — trustlessly or not — what matters is that OP now has them and want to keep them without trusting a hardware wallet company.
I grew up around then, and definitely noticed the only people who weren't selling out where those who didn't have the opportunity to.
When you type the signature on your computer, how do you know you are not unknowingly transmitting your seed? If your hardware wallet is malicious the "signature" it displays could be your seed instead of an actual signature.

> I would hope signing the transaction hash is deterministic?

Not really. A signer can generate an arbitrary number of valid signatures for the same message, using the same private key because the signature algorithm requires a secret random number. There are ways to generate the signature deterministically by deriving that secret random number from the private key but AFAIK, the only way to verify this was actually done requires knowing the private key in the first place.

I believe you a malicious signer could iterate through valid signatures until the first n bits correspond to bits it wants to leak.

That's actually an even bigger problem that I hadn't considered before.

https://medium.com/@simonwarta/signature-determinism-for-blo...
It's quite well known that Australopithecus were outcompeted because they used to bottle feed.
Or with numbered parameters (since ruby 3.0)

list.each { work_on(_1) }
This approach is more common these days, though probably for different reasons. A massive subset of modern anime and video game franchises from overseas implicitly or explicitly allow fan works as long as basic rules are met - people can create and share fan comics, games, etc, and even sell art books or prints.

The people in charge of the franchises recognize that letting fans riff on the work will make them enjoy it more even if doing that means giving up control.

Touhou Project is famous for having barely any controls at all so there is a massive amount of high quality fan work available in multiple languages.
Note that starnix is not a rewrite of gvisor and in particular will not be portable to non fuchsia systems.
Do Ideas Have Shape?
A new way of looking at supervised learning: as generalizations of variational calculus.