skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
TBH, BTC has always been quite alright, but those so-called altcoins are becoming more and more ridiculous by the day. Once the NFT craze was in full swing, I thought we had reached peak comedy, but it seems my imagination was too poor.

Also, I thought that not every single alt-coin is a ponzi-like fraud, but I will probably be disproven once again.
Sargos explained how it’s misleading.

> “97% of the tokens are scams so Uniswap is unsafe to use"

People are likely to draw the unsafe assumption.

Sargos attempted to clarify that some safety is created with filtering via a trusted list.
Which of these statements do you think is false?

1) People make trades based on information, at least sometimes

2) People are tricked by false information, at least sometimes
It seems to me that these sorts of principles are incomplete if they don't engage with the fact that quarantines are a well established part of the social contract of all nations that I'm aware of.

Basically, there's a balance between avoiding coercion and holding people accountable for the externalities of irresponsible behavior. A reasonable tradeoff to me seems to be that people do not have to take precautions like vaccination and masking but if so they can be restricted from public society.
I blame a growing contingent of redditors joining HN as r/programming is becoming spammy nonsense. I’m one of them but I keep my mouth shut and rarely comment. I predict that HN will also start to rot as this trend continues. And we’re maybe going to end up right where we started: subscribing to our favourite news outlets.
> I think all archive links are auto-flagged

https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=archive.org

Plenty archive links not flagged. I think the hypothesis that archive links are auto-flagged is likely incorrect
What a weird take.

Are you saying that if these for-profit corporations didn't charge absurd amounts to US citizens, then the drug would be unattainable for Canadians?
9. Is crazy.

There is a many things we can do at home to reduce risk of covid. They get zero visibility. People have been programmed to see everything outside the narrative as quackery.

But it’s deeper than covid, it’s the general modus operandi of modern medicine.
Is it in the US government's interest to see FTX thrive, or to see it disappear? What about crypto currency in general?
Directors you say ? https://twitter.com/bgurley/status/1591216734564155393
The companion argument is that neither of those industry changes were unexpected, and thus if the market is behaving intelligently (so much that "of course they're not buying/selling based on tweets!" applies) then they wouldn't have moved the needle as they would be priced in. Smart market actors are surely more likely to immediately respond to surprise news (like an official-seeming tweet announcing insulin is free) than they are to respond to news that was well understood. The company market cap is >$300bn, a $150m fine is a cost of doing business.
The problem with “if done properly” is that you actually have to go and check. If you just “hope that it is done properly” you can have a lot of surprises, like lights going out when the sink gets full of water. Or spicy dishwashers.

If you don’t know whether it’s properly done, it’s much more efficient to throw a ground cable from the nearest service junction than it is to “hope” and then have to fix things later.
I mean... I don't want to speculate about that particular incident, but generally, increasing parts of portfolio management seem to be done by algorithms. It seems plausible to me that the "verified" badge on twitter could be coded as some sort of trust anchor in some of those.

Something like "scan all tweets of the last day for names of our stocks + some keywords, but restrict the search to verified accounts only".

That kind of signal would be strongly affected by the current chaos.
> Whatever happened to them needing to represent the interests of the people?

They are representing the interests of the people*.

* Rich people. You know, the ones who matter. It would be communist to listen to poor people, and they don't bribe well either!
I guess number 6 is often ignored?
DEX are working nicely and constantly improving. Today, CEX are only useful for on/off ramp of fiat.
Yes, and air conditioning is far more efficient than heating.

https://www.pud3.org/blog/articles--blog/behind-the-scenes-a...
Thank you for such a great tool. I've recently migrated from one server to another server in different contenient via `zfs send | zfs recv` (using hrmpf), and `generate-zbm` inside the chroot was all I need to get it working again.
Golang tend to be used for application programming these days. Not only system works. Including today's top page article.
Unfortunately I think the biggest red flag is one that doesn't become widely publicized, and I don't know if it happened in this case: a well-respected senior hire comes into the firm and leaves quickly, after discovering the mess. Excuses are made if it does become public, but most people brush it off as not clicking with the culture.

Someone I know joined a rather large investment firm and this happened. I only knew about the mess because I'm friends with him, but oh boy it was a mess. Guy moved on, doesn't mention it anymore, but will tell you if you know him.

Similar story with a major international bank. Friend goes in, sees a load of bodies (board members doing shady things), leaves. Nothing to report.
No, it's because our government negotiates on behalf of all Canadians. And we are a very big healthcare market (even with a small population) since we all participate in the health care system – since it's public.
Well, if I use some altcoin as a savings account, how is keeping custody over it going to save me when the altcoin owner decides to pull the rug? And 2022 has shown that when it comes to Ponzi-schemes, raising interest rates means harvest-time.
If you believe there is more to come and this isn’t over, are you still holding crypto?
There's a lot of value in modern browsers asking "what are all these JS frameworks providing?" and providing primitives for the top 20% of features natively.

The existence of JS frameworks to build apps, in this sense, I think can be seen as a browser failure. The browser exists to provide a GUI for HTTP, and it's failing to provide "the common default" we now expect.
I would contend that that is a downside of combining the url and search entry fields in the browser, not a downside of having many TLDs.
I wish it were easily downloadable and testable
No, your vaporware office scenario still isn't going to get me to come into the office. :-)

And I find it very hard to believe. When I started working in the 1980s, everybody got a cubicle, we didn't even like cubicles!, but you had walls and it was quieter and people treated it like your personal space.

In my last job, I could've stood up and put my hand on seven different people's shoulders without moving my feet.

So your quiet shielded office doesn't sound like anything an actual company does.

> you’ll need to surrender quite a bit of that to interruptions when remote -

No, you get a lot fewer interruptions when working remotely than in an office. Deliveries do not take an hour a day, particularly when there are two adults who can split the task.

Pet interruptions take basically zero time per day because they aren't actually an interruption: I don't have to stop thinking about my problem for one second, but if I have to answer a single question about some other technical thing, I blow away my whole thought process and have to build it up again.
haha good riddance greedy speculators.
Agreed but I think people should be looking at power companies and how they generate energy for accountability instead of going for industry A and B. Wiping PoW from the face of the earth won’t make those coal plants in China go away.
This is logically incoherent. It would only be true if you chose a token completely at random instead of choosing a widely-used token you wanted to use.

Reminds me of "it either works or it doesn't, so there's a 50/50 chance"
If you are a government, corporation or wealthy person committing injustices - or a powerful MP deservedly on a sex abuse list - I unreservedly condemn you. I also encourage you not to mock people who have been included on such lists from slander.
Turn Raspberry Pi’s GPIO into an FM Transmitter (2012)
Maybe all the problems with crypto will give ordinary people pause before trusting digital money, even if it comes from central banks. One can always hope.
Wow... that is a shocking level of philistinism given his parentage.

His own mum wrote a seemingly well-received book, and Will MacAskill, who he claims is his moral hero, has written three books.
I expect it's the landlord instructing the electrician to do a half-assed job to keep the cost down.
Show HN: Stable Diffusion based graphics editor
The OP title is misleading because the relevant number to think about with regards to scams on Uniswap is the percentage of value traded, not the percentage of tokens launched.

People can and do spam Uniswap with fake tokens, because it is wide open and anyone can interact with it. That doesn't necessarily mean that large amounts are being lost trading these scam tokens. I don't know the numbers myself, but if 99% percent of Uniswap trades are WBTC, ETH, LINK, USDC, DAI, and other big-name tokens, and 1% are scams, then the scale of the problem is not at all what is implied by the headline.

If someone is serious about measuring fraud on UniSwap, they would look into the percentage of value traded accounted for by these scam tokens.

This question matters from a policy perspective because headlines like this disparage one of the best things to emerge from crypto in recent years (DeFi) and deflect criticism away from where it is deserved (centralization).

DeFi apps like Uniswap are safer than centralized exchanges because you can see everything that is happening on-chain, and maintain custody of your own tokens yourself. Most people who were relying of FTX have been screwed by the exchange itself, regardless of the market value of the token that they thought they owned. If you lose money on Uniswap it's not because the exchange did something wrong, but because the issuer of the token did something wrong, or simply because the token you purchased fell in value.

If you are trading ETH, WBTC, LINK, USDC on Uniswap, you are better protected than if you are trading these same tokens on any of the centralized exchanges.
Indeed. If you have 100k shells, you can at least sell them on Craigslist. With a fully collapsed Bitcoin valuation, the last “good” state of the chain is public knowledge, and you may know the private key associated with 100k BTC as indicated by the last good chain, but you can’t reliably do anything with that knowledge.

So the chain itself could become a fascinating artifact, but the magic that made it possible to move Bitcoin around would be gone.
97% of the things available in my vanguard or Charles Schwab aren't scams.

It's preposterous to call a marketplace where less then 3% of the offerings are "legit" a safe market to use.
Is the secret AR game hidden inside Sword and Sworcery about to reach a climax?
Jeff Toobin might have a few ideas.
I agree, the MtGox collapse is the death of Bitcoin.
MF Global wasn’t a bank.

“Nothing to do with the crypto technology” is an empty and meaningless statement.

IF, and that’s a very big if, they got hacked, the fact that $600m could be moved and disappeared so quickly is 100% to do with the “crypto technology”. In the real financial system it is exponentially harder to make money disappear, transfers are logged on three sides of the transaction, you have to hack multiple autonomous and different tech stacks, and you have to wait as the transfers get transmitted, validated and passed in.
I’m a huge fan of OnShape. I wish they had a tier in between their free one and the $1500/yr slot but the software itself is great and the learning materials are really good too if you’re new to CAD generally. The plug-in and custom feature ecosystem is pretty great as well.
> But I can't find anything to quote right now

And you never will. Part of my point was that they want all the benefits of saying they're not going to provide long-term support, with none of the downsides of saying it. Hence you _know_ this to be true, but can't find it written down.

> I know this, so I update immediately, and get on with it. If you do something else then you're just denying reality.

"My boss treats me like badly / my internet service is poor / none of the software I paid for works two years from now / [any other endless examples of being treated like a shmuck]. I know this, and just get on with it. If you do something else then you're just denying reality"

> It is unreasonable to expect that, if that is not what has ever been promised to you or delivered in practice.

I don't need to be explicitly promised reasonable terms to find the way I'm being treated unreasonable. "Well, we never _said_ it would still work in a few years" is not going to cut it.

People, we used to have standards. Some of you are too young to remember — and I do _not_ mean to sound condescending, it's just true that some of you weren't around back then — but people had expectations of products, and they were high (in comparison to today). You bought things for life. We've been frog-boiled through iterations by companies like Apple to accept throwaway culture.
> Sorry if you don't see the pejorative connotations in the other term. We avoided it because we didn't wish to offend people.

You remind me of one of the tech leads I have the occasional displeasure of interacting with. He'll blow in with some new work for us to do, and a stack of reasons to do it. The topmost in the stack he'll provide, and the rest of the stack he keeps hidden. The problem with his stack of reasons are twofold:

1) It takes no less than five and -typically- fifteen minutes to get through the stack.

2) Only the reason at the base of the stack is non-bogus. All of the others are calibrated to sound _great_ to folks who don't work on the thing (and talk to customers who use the thing) day in and day out.

Next time, start with the reason at the bottom of your stack when you're talking to technical folks like us. ;)
I remember using this in the late 2000s. More commonly blocked now but was fun.
Wikipedia is one of the largest sites on the internet, and (to my knowledge) they are not running their own data centers.

> outsourcing infrastructure to cloud

Paying for AWS or building a data center are not the only two options. There are many co-location providers, there are dedicated firms with the expertise to run a data center for you...
I still don't get Lisp. Why does there need to be an endless amount of dialects? Doesn't this completely needlessly fracture the ecosystem into hundreds of pieces making it impossible to effectively support?

Isn't the point of Lisps to be endlessly customizable, making the invention of a new dialect less necessary?

The only Lisp I'd consider for a real project is probably Clojure and I'd even be hesitant about that. Sure, you can make a simple web project with Arc (HN), but it seems like you get 0 libraries, 0 interfaces with other systems and 0 tooling. Why would I bother with that?
10k - 2k BC Humanity advanced so much during this period, Egypt, Iraq, India, China, etc. that it surprises humans as modern as of today (who consider Aliens helped them achieve such feat).

I also want to know what went wrong that the whole world went back to being illiterate villagers soon after that. (I'm betting my money on climate change).

My second choice is 2k BC - 0 because of similar reasons as mentioned by @slolean13
“In January 2013, a judge approved a settlement that would return 93 percent of customers' investments”

A great deal larger than nothing.
Proxy simply means doing an action on behalf of another entity. This could be a human, a computer or even entire country ("proxy war")
In the spirit of

8. Public health scientists and practitioners should avoid conflicts-of-interest, and any unavoidable conflicts-of-interest must be clearly stated.

"Hillsdale [College] is a conservative Christian institution with ties to the Trump administration. And the scholars behind the academy — Scott Atlas, Jay Bhattacharya, and Martin Kulldorff — are connected to right-wing dark money attacking public health measures." (https://www.levernews.com/how-the-koch-network-hijacked-the-...)
> If you go to Uniswap right now you will not see any of these tokens and have a near 0% chance of being scammed

If there's 100 tokens listed on the front page, and one of them is a scam, that may be near 0%, but it's equally near to 2%.

I'd be pretty confident that there's a >1% chance of being scammed on a platform like this. FTT wasn't thought to be a scam until it was proven to be.

Unless a token issuer does so with fully audited accounting with real assets backing their tokens, why should any token not be default assumed to be a scam, instead of default assumed to be valid?

Popularity and usage doesn't change this point. USDT may be incredibly popular, but it also lacks credibility.

Disclaimer: I still remain long BTC (lol@myself)
The paper does not analyze the transactions directly unless I'm missing that piece. There are a number of reasons accounts would interact with the scam tokens such as the scamming group filling up the liquidity pool, creating fake volume to add legitimacy, and other steps to complete the scam.

There's also the obvious case of the scammers getting a user to actually buy the token (perhaps through spam email or "pump groups" that give explicit instructions on how to perform the swap) which I'm not saying has never happened but I do claim is more rare. Even the obviously silly scam emails do have the occasional person click on them and lose their money. The upside is that getting scammed on Uniswap is actually harder as you need to manually bypass safety features.
Either way you’re still fulfilling business requirements. If there’s a more efficient way to serve the same goal, you’re talking optimisation, and that absolutely aligns with a smaller code base (again the actual point of the article), but not ‘less features’
https://www.theodinproject.com/paths/full-stack-javascript

There is a full stack JS track with Node instead of Rails.
Aside: this made me chuckle:

extern void construct(), destruct();

Never occurred to me.
GDPR only applies if you are selling or providing services to entities in EU. Which I think isn't an overreach.
Trusting all individuals to make safe decisions in a marketplace flooded with scams is just not scalable. You cannot educate every user in how to identify a scam.

And excluding users who haven't gone through that education hardly seems like the democratization of finance that these services advertise.
97.7% of products don't work as advertised either
Some of the key people behind ECH (Encrypted Client Hello, work to hide SNI and other potentially sensitive information from the Client Hello in TLS) work for outfits which would be delivering basically the same functionality via ECH, such as Cloud companies and CDNs. Of course it is possible they don't intend to ever deploy this (but then they've wasted months of work which seems strange) or that their employers won't allow it (but then they're wasting some fraction of productive effort by an employee) but it's also possible their explanation is real. Lets see what the difference is between ECH and Domain Fronting:

Consider two clients, Alice and Bob, they are both connecting to some IP 10.20.30.40 using TLS or QUIC.

Alice wants to access naughty.thing.example and Bob wants to access bland.stuff.example. Perhaps Mallory is trying to prevent Alice from accessing naughty.thing.example (but they don't mind bland.stuff.example) or perhaps Alice just doesn't want Eve to know what she's accessing. Mallory and Eve are both on the network, able to interpose between Alice and Bob and 10.20.30.40 and neither Alice nor Bob can easily prevent that.

Under domain fronting, Bob is just honest, he tells the server I want bland.stuff.example, and then he uses bland.stuff.example as usual and everything works. This means for technical operations it's OK if the 10.20.30.40 server cares what Bob said during connection. For example maybe once Bob says bland.stuff.example, the server spins up an IPC to a Python server which only knows about bland.stuff.example and splices Bob's connection to the IPC.

Under domain fronting, Alice's situation is tricky. Alice says she wants bland.stuff.example but she actually uses naughty.thing.example and expects that to work. Technical ops people who've arranged that bland.stuff.example connections get spliced are faced with bug reports - why didn't naughty.thing.example work, 10.20.30.40 was the right server ???

Under ECH, both Alice and Bob are presenting a visible name (which might be bland.stuff.example or some other value entirely) which Mallory and Eve can easily read, but they're also providing an encrypted destination, Alice can encrypt naughty.thing.example while Bob encrypts bland.stuff.example† The 10.20.30.40 server can decrypt the name, and thus it knows which service Alice and Bob actually intend to access.

† If you thought "What about padding? Those names are different lengths" congratulations, you're now at step 1 of a long process which is why this was not trivial to design and implement.
Sam already had a boy genius profile, and more positive coverage of him would plausibly have translated to better returns on their investment in FTX.
A former coworker and I played around with this. He was red team, I was blue. It was a fun experiment. Stopping this with some of the corporate firewalls is easy but I wanted to see if I could break it with rate limiting. Unbound has really nice controls for IP/domain rate limiting but it's a double edged sword. Iodine can be broken with rate limiting but then poorly coded applications also break. One would have to take on the challenge of fixing all applications to obey TTL's and it turns out that is quite a monumental challenge. This also required increasing the min TTL of requests and that has an impact on AWS EC2 instances that are designed around a 5s TTL. In the end all I could come up with was a way to alert on an IP exhibiting this behavior and send a syslog message with the IP and just hope someone responds to it quickly enough which is a very sub-optimal solution. The expensive corporate firewalls would just block that specific IP for a period of time and also send an alert which I suppose could have been done with a wrapper to null route the specific IP but then false positives from poorly coded applications would result in outages. At least with the corporate firewalls people could point the finger at them and not me. It was still fun nonetheless.

If anyone is curious why we were going through this exercise, all 50k+ servers had Unbound running locally to take the load off the edge recursive servers and handle upstream fail-over faster. Unbound is remarkable in the data-center for this purpose.
Beautiful, compact summary going to the heart of language philosophy,
what we can and should build and for what purposes. To hardened
pragmatists this probably looks like ideology and pointless tinkering
at it's worst, but I think the slow, eventual path to sucklessness
lies here in the vibrancy. Lisp will have its day again :)
Wow, I'm really surprised. Of all the people who could make anti-intellectual statements, I really thought SBF was one of the last.

I get that many books these days are long winded (looking at you Nassim Taleb) ways to make a point, but someone absolutely needs to document all the thinking somewhere. Whether you read the whole book in detail is also optional.

But to generalize this much about all books is astonishing.

Plus he's a math/physics grad, aren't those books super dense with new lemmas on every page?