skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
That's the point. Their models showed their strategies to be safe, while in reality, their strategy was risky enough to bankrupt the fund, and scare the entire financial system.

> In August 2007 most of the big quant funds lost double digit percentages in a few days when someone had to unwind a portfolio and statarb strategies stopped working.

If your strategy works for years and then a single event erases all the historical profits and puts you in the red, your strategy always sucked because it ignored tail events.
I'm currently building a static site generator, which will generate something like jsFiddle, but can be deployed using github page.

If only I had known this, I would not spend time on it.

But I wasn't able to try it:

Uh oh, something went wrong!
Failed to fetch
That relies on the other party agreeing to such terms. They may well choose a pay-later setup offered by an otherwise more expensive contractor, and then go on to play accounting reindeer games just like this.
What you are quoting was written by the composer of the soundtrack (Mick Gordon)
If they don't make the website provide value to me, I will stop paying them. If things are popping up that are irrelevant to my search, that's not helping me. If it's not helping me, I stop paying, and they feel a hit. It's probably not a big deal if a single person does it, but if enough people do it, then they either change to get those people back (or replace them with new customers), or they go out of business.
The ownership of those works is certainly a complex issue. Contractually ownership would have been assigned to id, but what happens for unpaid work? What about works in progress? Depends on the contract terms and the interpretation of those terms. Sounds like a lot of grey areas, and there can be significant repercussions for making spurious DMCA claims.
What world are you living in where popularity is somehow a way of judging quality? The masses love marvel movies and fast food
Yeah, not only that, but that’s the NEWER Selenium Python API. The older style was actually (imo) easier to grapple with, discover, etc. The whole thing has felt like it’s either written by people that don’t work with Python very often, or that it’s too married to the idea of being a close port of an API targeted at…yeah…Java.
The smarter bet is to provide the balls but have someone else provide the funds.
> Now, a declarative system is one where the user describes the desired end state and invariants on the admissible intermediate states of the universe. The system needs to figure out the current state of the universe, find the difference and find an admissible path to eliminate the difference. The litmus test to discern the two types of systems is whether the system concerns itself with the difference as a primary concept.

Whether the system charged with realizing desired states reasons about the current state is actually not relevant. Declarative systems work by generating the desired state 'from scratch', often with some kind of efficient cache.

A declaratively styled configuration system which still works by transitioning the system between target states statefully is still subject to the same problems as imperative configurations, but they're abstracted away from your field of view, as long as things sort of work.

A stateless approach, also typically (always?) configured in a declarative style, actually addresses these problems in a principled way. For an example, consider NixOS vs. Puppet, Chef, Ansible, etc.: https://www.domenkozar.com/2014/03/11/why-puppet-chef-ansibl...

I like that essay's term for the paradigmatic differences, rather than the merely stylistic differences between imperative and declarative configurations: convergent vs. isomorphic.
The lambda calculus is useful without modification. It can also be used to model other simpler languages or logics which are power and elegant in their own right.

So, yes, since I've used the lc in these ways I believe the same claim can be made regarding the lambda calculus.
This is marketing. That's all it is. It may as well be called "Search engine alternative to Google declares Google's secret sauce is dying".

This reminds me of posts from 10 years ago where "the future of search of social" (this post says "user-centric" instead). Even Google feared that outcome (given the then-meteoric rise of Facebook; oh how the turns have tabled). Personally I find the musings in this post to border on nonsencial.

But here's the interesting part: certain ideas are sticky just people want them to be true. The core one here is that "search is broken" or even the lesser "Google is getting worse". It's one many on HN like to push. I don't think theres any quantitative empirical evidence of this. It's people wanting it to be true and you'll see it on every thread about DDG (as one notable example).

Silicon Valley is littered with the corpses of "Google killers" who seem to have all fallen into different versions of this trap.
IBM Quantum System Two
Have a look on twitter. A few people “me too”ing wrt their relations with the guy.
So I gather you don't use React daily?

It can be as you say sometimes, but most other times, it's akin to Chesterton's Fence or Gell-Mann Amnesia, talking about something without actually knowing anything about it. It's not only wrong, it's useless.
Always add the keyword 'forum' to your search terms. It filters out most of the crap.
How do we reconcile between these kinds of news and that Quantum Physicist who says that Quantum computers never will amount to anything? I'm confused ...
> It's awfully nice if you used Page Object Model and you have a single-point-of-truth to fix it.

I like fewer sources of truth, but I dislike trying to force everything into a "page" analogy. Try maintaining a library of commonly-used actions instead, like:

logIn()
registerNewUser()
addItemToCart()

And maybe group them thematically.

The underlying intent is the same... reduce duplication, improve organization. But you won't be stuck wondering "what page am I on now?" in a single page application, or rifling through folder upon folder of nonsensical "page" files.

And even in the worst case, Ctrl-Shift-H still works.
Seems cool and I like seeing more alternatives to Docker Desktop. However, another electron app makes sad a little.
What was the point of decentralizing then?
The comments were specifically about Zuckerberg's character. The replies should be about Zuckerberg's character. The reply in question didn't even mention him.
that's the best History of Bitcoin I've ever read
> In the future, instead of everyone sharing the same search engine, you’ll have your completely individual, personalized Mike or Julia or Jarvis - the AI. Instead of being scared to share information with it, you will volunteer your data, knowing its incentives align with yours.

This is true IFF this software is open source and running on my own server. Hard to see how this can happen.
To be fair, even if Boeing's legal team cuts the CYA maintenance clause out of the purchase agreement, absolutely nothing will change in terms of actual maintenance on the aircraft they sell. The FAA requires all certified aircraft flying in US airspace to be maintained in accordance with the manufacturer's approved instructions as a condition of airworthiness.

Doesn't seem like a great analogy for consumer electronics sales.
One option is to create a 'slow search engine' that only re-ranks pages once a year, doing the computation during the year and then updating the ranks all at once. You could evaluate the ranking before releasing it and patch obvious exploits, or even patch out exploits after the yearly release using data from before the release. This should slow the info leak to a crawl
Charles Dickens words in, A Tale of Two Cities describes the cryptospace (at least for the past couple of months perfectly):

It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair, we had everything before us, we had nothing before us, we were all going direct to Heaven, we were all going direct the other way--in short, the period was so far like the present period that some of its noisiest authorities insisted on its being received, for good or for evil, in the superlative degree of comparison only."
> Over the years, the web deteriorated to the state it is in now - a highly destructive force.

You can’t be serious with a claim like this
It might be possible to use a Podman machine on Linux as well. ( You may loose performance but could update as soon it's available)

Or use https://software.opensuse.org/package/podman
the point was about storing value in the crypto ecosystem without losing it, after 4 references to stablecoins, so stablecoins. USDC would have been fine. USDT would have been as well, with fluctutations in notional value for brief periods mitigated by redemptions remaining at 100% when redeemed through the issuer

in direct contrast to storing on exchanges, or non-stablecoin crypto assets
A couple of proofs!

next.github.com redirects to the site

You can see Blocks and Hey, GitHub! on https://github.com/features/preview

Watch Kyle's universe session linked elsewhere in the thread, he's going to be showing off a variety of projects from GitHub Next

There are some very good reasons why we exist outside the primary domain — mostly security-related! The blast radius of our experimentation should not include github.com :D
Yes, Stack Graphs power code navigation for supported languages (currently, Python). We also use tree-sitter parsers for CTags-style symbol navigation.
A lesser known bit of trivia about this is that IBM would go on to use Transitive's technology for the exact opposite of Rosetta -- x86 to PowerPC translation, in the form of "PowerVM Lx86", released that year (2008).

It's very fascinating to me, since IBM appears to have extended the PowerPC spec with this application specifically in mind. Up until POWER10, the Power/PowerPC ISA specified an optional feature called "SAO", allowing individual pages of memory to be forced to use an x86-style strong memory model, comparable to the proprietary extension in Apple's CPUs, but much more granular (page level and enforced in L1/L2 cache as opposed to the entire core).

As far as I can tell, Transitive's technology was the only application to ever use this feature, though it's mainlined in the Linux kernel, and documented in the mprotect(2) man page. IBM ditched the extension for POWER10, which makes sense, since Lx86 only ever worked on big endian releases of RHEL and SLES which are long out of support now.

One mystery to me, though, is IBM added support for this page marker to the new radix-style MMU in POWER9. It's documented in the CPU manual, but Linux has no code to use it -- unless I've missed it, Linux only has code to set the appropriate bits in HPT mode, and no reference to the new method for marking radix pages SAO as the manual describes. I can't imagine there was any application on AIX which used this mode (it only decreases performance), and unless you backported a modern kernel to a RHEL 5 userland, you couldn't use Lx86 with the new radix mode. Much strangeness...
I think bitcoin has little intrinsic value compared to ethereum.
ignoring the vindictive joy i feel at the loudest dumbest people losing money, its a very good thing for bitcoin to die because its got so many awful externalities imo.
It is true that a cabal of rich people cannot arbitrarily modify the money supply. We instead get a permanently chosen system of money supply that was created by an ideologically driven software engineer who appears to have vanished into the ether. Is it not possible that Satoshi chose a less optimal system than the central banks would? The finite and logarithmic rewards make a huge huge huge difference in the eventual distribution of BTC worldwide, should it become a dominant system. In my opinion, a system where early adopters get unimaginably rich forever is simply unethical.

And if another system eventually wins... then isn't that simply an example of a cabal of people (though not necessarily rich at first in this case) modifying the rules for money supply? Doge produces a different outcome than BTC. That's important.
And looks like it did.
I think Hacker News has a pretty great system built on mostly positive upvotes but it might be even better to have social media that don't even have voting or liking and just let you express yourself without them.
They're targeting 20% reductions right now. ~14% via layoffs and the remainder via attritiion.
In 2011 it crashed 94% ($35 -> $2)

In 2013 it crashed 83% ($260 -> $45)

In 2015 it crashed 87% ($1,140 -> $150)

In 2017 it crashed 82% ($19,900 -> $3,540)

In 2022 it crashed 76% ($66,938 -> $15,853) - so far..

As we can see, 80% crash for Bitcoin has not been that scary.
Has there ever been a good way to short bitcoin? I'm guessing not, otherwise it never would've reached such ridiculous prices. I think I'd bet real money on it going below $100.
Just to clarify:

> Published September 22, 2022
There are two aspects to this that I find interesting, one is that disorders are described in terms of traits when they are predominantly a matter of degree, and the other is that the modern world enables these disorders to amplify to such a degree by blocking out nature, or the natural order of things, and also by producing so many durable items.
> but you're trading $100 worth of Crypto A into $100 worth of USDT or whatever other 'stablecoin' ostensibly backed dollar for dollar with USD, thus there are no gains.

If your basis (purchase) value—irrespective of the current value—of Crypto A is $100, sure. But that would be the same if you converted into actual USD.

But if you actually had gains on Crypto A, say the purchase price was $50 and you sold for $100 worth of USDT, you would have a $50 taxable gain.

“A16. [...] If you exchange virtual currency held as a capital asset for other property, including for goods or for another virtual currency, you will recognize a capital gain or loss. [...]

“A17. Your gain or loss is the difference between the fair market value of the property you received and your adjusted basis in the virtual currency exchanged. [...]” [0]

> If you sell a crypto for USD you may get taxed. If you convert it to equal amounts of a different crypto there are no gains and no tax.

No, you will owe taxes in exactly the same situations as you would if you exchanged the crypto for USD: if the value of what you sold it for exceeds the basis (not current) value of what you sold.

Now, its possible that you can find a crypto exchange that doesn’t deal in US currency or with US banks and is less likely to report information to the IRS, so that trading into stablecoins or other crypto helps you evade taxes that are legally due. But it is not a hack around actually having a taxable event. (In fact, it potentially, if the stablecoin isn’t perfectly stable, makes the purchase with the stablecoin as well as the sale into it a taxable event, which would not be the case with actual USD.)

[0] https://www.irs.gov/individuals/international-taxpayers/freq...
As I get older I become more and more disenchanted with, it's hard to say, what, exactly - America? Performance in the pandemic, refusal to even consider different ideas, rhetoric around elections and so on. Shameful that scientists and doctors are silenced when they disagree with our largely unelected leaders - but much worse and much more shameful is that the people responsible for our terrible COVID response will remain in power - same as the people responsible for foreign policy disasters and so on.
Well presumably the other party will agree at $0. So it’s really a question if there’s a mutually agreeable price, not whether it’s feasible in the first place.
The Binance takeover of FTX has been called off after "due diligence", so get ready for more chaos.
It's a race for who was most deluded in 2021!
Space is huge. Even if we are the first one in the galaxy and we manage to spread. It's going to be tremendously difficult to do, certainly doable even at today's technology but with consequence of time. There's likely a habitable planet 4 lightyears away. But we are hundreds of years away if we leave today.

Flipside, I won't name names. They are utterly crazy and yet routinely correct. His assertion is aliens are on earth today, they don't use spaceship but are multidimensional. I'm biting on this one. I believe it.
At the end of the day CUNY is just another community college albeit with a large number campuses(25). Why does the article make it seem like CUNY should be held responsible for making sure the people who graduate with an undergraduate degree from them can land a job in their chosen career field regardless of prior work experience, much less a job specifically in the extremely competitive job market of NYC? Companies in NYC can pull from a global pool of talent so how are undergraduates from a community college supposed to be competitive with people with PHDs from foreign countries that are willing to work extremely cheaply just to get into the US?

I personally waited until I had enough experience in tech for companies to start inviting me to work in NYC before I gave it a try(happened to have co-workers from Chandigarh and Hyderabad although one was a UK citizen) and it's not an experience I would repeat. Personally I think working in NYC is a lot like Alaska in that it can be an extreme environment and I think people need to experience it at least once to truly appreciate not working in extreme environments.
I'm a religious person but I think I can abstract this so it doesn't require a religion.

I think your purpose is to overcome evil. Most of the evil that we have the ability to overcome is internal and if everyone did that the world would be a much better place.

In reading The Gulag Archipelago there is a part where the author has spent chapter after chapter describing the horrible conditions of the prison he is. It seems like a horrible place. A place where there can be no meaning, no hope for those inside it. Then he says this:

“Bless you, prison!”

I . . . have served enough time there.

I nourished my soul there, and I say without hesitation: “Bless you, prison, for having been in my life!

https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/justin-taylor/aleks...

You see he realized that prison had given him the humility to see the flaws in his own character and to deal with those flaws. He felt much better off having been through that and transformed by it.

Many of us try to find meaning in things that inspire us or make us feel good. But if we find meaning in the the things that transform us into something better we can find joy in even the most horrible circumstances. We can truly become someone better.
Counterparty risk.

Lets say you borrowed 1BTC from FTX exchange so that you can short BTC. Congrats, you're correct! You're technically worth a lot more US-dollars now.

You go to FTX, and it stopped existing today. So you don't get your money. In fact, it turns out that you never had borrowed 1BTC in the first place, because FTX where you handled this whole concept has stopped existing entirely.

-------

You can only do things like "short" something if the bank you're shorting with still exists by the end of it all.

You can't win this at all. You _MUST_ have trust with somebody to do any kind of financial trade (be it a long, or short, or any other such complex trade). If that trust is broken, everything collapses.
There's also `git pull --rebase`, which is just "pull like normal, then rebase onto the thing I just pulled".

Remember that it's okay to screw around and break stuff! Sometimes that's the best way to learn. Git's whole thing is tracking history, even the history of the history itself[0]. It is hard to accidentally lose something if you've committed it at least once.

If you're nervous, push your branch somewhere before starting (it's not strictly necessary, but it's the easiest way to get peace of mind).

Nothing you do locally will be pushed back to the remote unless you explicitly do `git push`. If you manage to screw up your branches so badly you don't know how to recover, you can just delete the local branch you broke and re-pull the remote one like it's a new branch, even if it's main/master.

[0] https://ohshitgit.com/, especially the first thing there
It doesn't matter. People never learn - a tale as old as time itself.
The downvoters are being pedantic. Sure you could save 400k in cash with thrift and gumption, but the simple fact is that almost no one does, and certainly not enough people to soak up all the excess housing stock as rates continue to rise. A person could save that, but people do not.
Its sad to have to open a new web page/App for everything. Happy to see things go the integration-direction and hopefully seeing some synergies.
But, JIT vs. AoT is a false dichotomy. Given light-weight enough profiling utilizing cooperation between hardware designers and compiler writers, one could have AoT with feedback-guided optimization and link-time optimization, and still have just-in-time re-optimization.

Concretely, I think you'd want hardware that supported reservoir sampling of where CPU cycles are spent, sampling of which branches are mispredicted, and which code locations are causing cache misses. You'd also want lightweight hardware recording of execution traces.
Yes, you can short on FTX... er Binance.
The only way to make a buck is for someone else to lose a buck. There's nothing else in the exchange here so it's just perverse.

But I wouldn't call people idiots that invest but uninformed and/or desperate and/or uncaring. If someone has an extra $1000 in the bank they think what's the worst that can happen? It's a mistake but you can see how these exchanges are worth billions all of a sudden and the dollars being pulled in to make these billionaires have to come from someone else.
I will always remember a commercial wherein some shitty marketing company promised to hack Google's algorithm and get you on the first page.

So what destroyed the relative purity of search engines and the early web? Money.
How do we solve it? Money apparently.

Yeah good luck with that.
China is against Putin nuking Ukraine, if he does he will get a death by a thousand cuts.
I think I might argue that the "Maxwell's Equations of Software" could be a set of things that proscribe and constrain...whose consequences are pervasive throughout.

For example:

Turing Machines and the Halting Problem

Queueing Theory

Shannon Entropy

The CAP Theorem
Looks nice initially but I worry it is akin to closing an open standard, ie embracing and extending and... . I'm not saying that was the intention, but if there is other stuff added to what should ostensibly be a simple Markdown file, it will be harder for me to migrate elsewhere if I think GitHub is lacking in other respects in the future, a form of vendor lock-in.
It feels magical, but that part is actually fine. The senior claims on that combined debt really can be pretty high quality. The junior claims are dogshit though.
Personally I think the idea of crypto is sound but any one coin is worthless. In 40 years we might all be using crypto and blockchains but we have no idea which coin it would be. Bitcoin seems almost purely less useful than eth so I don't imagine it's going to do so well as crypto moves from speculation to real usage.
--amend is conceptually nothing else than interactive rebase to squash the last two commits together.
I'd just love to know if Docker is ever going to fix the issue where my computer kernel panics when going into hibernation if my macbook is unplugged and docker is running. Had an open, reproducible issue for a quite while that has affected lots of other folks too, but no real recognition from Docker.
Is there a portainer equivalent for podman (web based instead of a desktop app)?