skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Data can either be not-shared, shared to service providers with contractual obligations [...], or shared to service providers who may then use [...].

To follow up, this distinction is also made by both GDPR in Europe, and CCPA in California. (In fact, CCPA uses the same term "Service Provider" and I wouldn't be surprised if that's where Google got it from.)

Still, both GDPR and CCPA require disclosure of Processors/Service Providers.

Transfers to a Processor/Service Provider have restrictions, and that's significant. Such third parties are treated differently under the law, with those restrictions removing the need for other safeguards. But the don't entirely remove any risk.

Ultimately one of the goals of these disclosures is letting the user take control over how their data is used and distributed. Some users (including you, and including myself) are comfortable with data transfers that are protected by legal safeguards rather than technical ones. Some are not comfortable with that, and have valid reasons to be. Some users reasonably want to know their full security risk exposure, which means being aware of which parties are handling their data. Some users simply don't want to do business with certain platform providers, even indirectly.

I'll also point out that the EU has found that US safeguards about transfers to Service Providers are inadequate, because if a third party has your data that means US law enforcement can get your data from that third party. So there are very valid concerns that the safeguards Google considers adequate for a Service Provider may not satisfy all users.

All of which is to say, I agree that the distinction about Service Providers is useful and meaningful, but I think it is the wrong decision to exempt Service Providers from being listed altogether.
I think we need some kind of standard "Unicode-light" with limitations to allow it to be used on low specs hardware and without weird edge cases like this. A bit like video codecs that have "profiles" which are limitations you can adhere to to avoid overwhelming low end hardware.

It wouldn't be "universal", but enough to write in the most commonly used languages, and maybe support a few, single codepoint special characters and emoji.
> possibly even make money

Hate to say it, but I think this is the only reason why.

Thank the absurd copyright laws that grant a piece of work two lifetimes of money extraction (70 years after the death of whoever made it) for whoever "owns" it.
Right? The whole history of capitalism can be written in terms of "well that's fucked up, how can we patch that hole?"

I used to work for traders on the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, a privately held marketplace for commodities and derivatives. It was an extremely capitalist place, and over the years it had evolved extremely tight internal regulations. You just did not fuck with the exchange or with your clearing firm. If you did, could end up a grease spot on the pavement.

All the extreme capitalists I worked with were fine with that. They wanted to keep on making lots of money, and strong regulation created something where people felt safe engaging. That meant high-volume, high-velocity money flows. They were all greedy, but long-term greedy.

I feel bad for the sweet summer children who were like, "We'll invent a money with no regulation and it will be utopia!"
Burn NPM to the ground and start over.. A ball of mud will not be fixed.
Right, but does it whip the LLaMA's ass?
I agree with that the books "should be allowed to fade away", not changed if people judge them to be offensive, as it's said in the article.

It doesn't sit right to me that there is someone owning the rights of the deceased author's work and should try to profit maximize the catalog. That is kind of what is happening here, trying to change the text to sell a slightly different book. It is their incentive to try to keep their sales alive, but it feels like an artificial thing. I guess I'm not used to how this particular sausage is made.
I'm actually a big fan of transferable digital in-game goods, although I see why some publishers wouldn't want it.

Real currency resale markets obviously come with a cost to the publishers, who are the original sellers of the good. However, they also have upsides to the publishers and players.

Magic the gathering is a good example because they have two online versions with different approaches.

In Magic The Gathering Online, you can transfer your digital goods. This means there are all kinds of 3rd parties making the ecosystem more efficient. You can buy and sell cards for real cash on dozens of websites, and you can even pay cash to rent expensive cards from bots. All in game purchases are also done in a tradable currency, so in theory, you could play the game without spending a penny with the publisher, but the publisher is still the origin of all consumable game currency.

The publisher also has a 2nd generation online platform, Magic the Gathering Arena. This version has no transferable assets and no financial ecosystem. They capture every penny, but miss out on users who want a financial exit option, and a ton of free publicity and events hosted by businesses operating in the MTGO ecosystem.

I think this is one of the better examples because Magic is already a collectables card game. That said, similar ecosystems have existed in games like eve online, Diablo, ect...

As with most things, I wonder what the value add is from Crypto, but perhaps it is there. I know some games have struggled with duplication and fake goods, which is particularly problematic when people are paying real cash for them. Perhaps crypto can address this issue
I would expect Europe to follow the US here. If US does nothing, truly Europe couldn't care less. If US is at war with China, I can't imagine Europe doing business as usual.
> Kind of a tangent, but is it fair to define ppl up in arms about this as “anti-woke”? Im basing this on the fact that anti-woke usually is considered right-wing/libertarian etc

You're right that one of these is unfair, but it is the latter not the former. "Woke" is the progressive fringe, not the mainstream. Opposition to woke is a set that includes both the moderate mainstream and the right fringe. Liberal enlightenment values, which represent the moderate majority today, are distinctly "anti-woke".
Come on now. By this measure, you know what else misrepresents Christianity? An absolute crap-ton of other Christian people and works. "Actions demonstrating faith" is a pretty reasonable kludge around that idea. I give it an A.

Signed, a catechized, confirmed, and arguably lapsed and now heretical Catholic :)
Signal: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/28/opinion/jack-dorseys-twit...
We can push the envelope vastly farther today than in the early 2000s. The difference is movies now have so much CGI that they can’t afford to spend much time on any of it.

Consider the LOTR orc army shots. Now days we can simply simulate various AI characters walking on uneven surfaces and it looks fine. The regimented look on flat ground worked, but it was based in large part on limitations at the time and just felt off. But conversely this means the army could and therefore would show up in the background in several shots which then means more vastly more CGI is needed. Unfortunately, more seconds of CGI means less me only you can spend on each of those seconds.
And an explanation of the specific substitutions made. Like, why erase Rudyard Kipling instead of having a conversation about the historical context of racism.
That's not in any sense of the word how anti-trust works.

That's just like saying that car manufacturers can't use idle capacity to help start a new line of vehicles just because a new car manufacturer couldn't create a new car line.
> but one would hardly say this means type 2 diabetes is fundamentally caused by eating too much.

Eating too much is literally what causes type 2 diabetes.
Do you have a link where I can read more about this? I'm surprised kids find third-person difficult. My eight-year-olds and their friends are all starting the Harry Potter books, and I haven't heard this complaint.
This sound like an opportunity to optimize the business costs. Assuming they can get out of their lease or other contracts, cut the loss and write-off any early cancellation contract penalties if possible in their state. Their finance department and tax consultants should be able to help with this. Let a philanthropist or co-founder lease the old/big building in a separate LLC and turn it into something cool if there is a desire to do so, keeping that burn rate out of the public numbers.

Lease a much smaller building with some good parking and put in "hotel space" desks, wifi, healthy snacks. Keep it as lean as possible and keep the contracts to 1 or 2 years. This gives people a chance to mentor in person and for people that need socialization to do so. The smaller building should have some meeting and training rooms and also some private/quiet rooms so people can focus. There should be a few sound-proof booths for phone calls to keep distractions to a minimum. Ensure that all levels of management have bi-annual training to make the best of remote-work and to ensure their employees are productive, healthy and happy.
I'm fascinated that they apparently took photos of actual human models in costume and based the cover art on that. I would understand using models if it were for animation in order to get motion capture, but you'd think for static pictures like cover art you wouldn't need to go to so much bother.
Forty years ago there was already this sentiment, as best as I can recall the quote: "It is well known that as the scale of the research grows, peer review becomes less effective."
I find search suggestions positively hostile, and is one of the first things I switch off.

I see that Mozilla has started pushing Pocket again. With the last upgrade, I got a new tab with a full-page Pocket ad. They don't need telemetry to discover that I've never used Pocket. I dislike their custom of using upgrades to stuff an ad in my face; and I dislike that scarce screen real-estate is used for an unnecessary button. If they've got to create a new tab on upgrade, it should show the changelist, not a "promotional message".

It's a bloody plug-in, and it should be possible to unplug it.
Nah, copyright is 70 years after the author’s death. They’ve got another 40 years or so before they have to ruin that.

This was probably just a money/publicity grab. I wouldn’t be surprised if the reissues of the originals were the original goal, but copyright didn’t have anything to do with it.
And then facebook will release a version which beats it ? :)
US billionaire financier Thomas Lee found dead at 78
You should read about sensitivity readers and the impact they are having on young adult literature in particular. It's a fundamental aspect of all new books being published and they wanted to generate renewed interest in Dahl's library of books for the new generation.

https://reason.com/2022/07/05/rise-of-the-sensitivity-reader...
Two different engineers, I am assuming Sandy Munro was disparaging Mr. Field. From your own Engadget link, you can clearly see that he had no vehicle manufacturing experience. Neither Apple, nor Segway produce automobiles, if that was unclear.

"Field, who previously worked at Apple and Segway, joined Tesla in 2013 to develop the company's next-generation EVs. In that sense, his mark on the company is hard to escape. However, there's a potential source of conflict. Elon Musk asked Field to handle both manufacturing and production in 2017, right as the Model 3 was becoming a practical reality. You may know what happened next. Tesla struggled to boost Model 3 production levels after relying too heavily on robots, and Musk took charge of manufacturing to be sure his company met its 5,000-a-week Model 3 production target. Field effectively lost a large part of his role."
Was any actual capital involved? That looks like a speculation bubble.
Well, let's start with the idea of “I wish I could invest in YouTube without investing in the rest of it”. Why not? YouTube is a more focused brand, with a world-beating product that's already active in multiple high-growth verticals (entertainment, shorts/vertical video, education, conspiracy theories). As the article says it can compete against both Netflix and TikTok (and probably Udemy, etc.). Aren't these high-growth areas worth investing in? aren't they more high-growth than whatever Google is doing this week? (I don't know, streaming video games to a watch and a new chat application probably).

And if you are investing in these areas and this is your only business isn't this "focus" all of a sudden important? (so you can actually compete in these businesses and potentially grow the business more?).

I for one like the idea --as well as I think Google needs to be broken up ten years ago. YouTube has scale, a good brand and would probably gain by being less Googley --i.e. iterative and consumer-focused. Not just YouTube, but the internet would be better off with a more focused YouTube (that also has less of your personal data as a bonus).
> 1. They hack computers not code. Their normal plan is to steal keys by compromising users and computers. This is in contrast to the normal "hack" that works by finding and exploiting bugs in code.

I'm just a 'regular security guy' but in that link you posted they detail that after the initial phishing compromise "The attacker managed to leverage that access to penetrate Sky Mavis IT infrastructure and gain access to the validator nodes." They don't detail the bugs that got them access to the nodes but this didn't give them control of the network so "the attacker found a backdoor through our gas-free RPC node, which they abused to get the signature for the Axie DAO validator.
...Sky Mavis requested help from the Axie DAO to distribute free transactions ... Axie DAO allowlisted Sky Mavis to sign various transactions on its behalf. This was discontinued in December 2021, but the allowlist access was not revoked."

Sounds like a pretty classic hack to me. They got into the network, got access to some important servers (how? they should be totally segregated from the corporate network). Then found a depreciated endpoint that allowed them blindly sign transactions. This is bread and butter for any pentesting work, makes me wonder if any of these web3 orgs are hiring security firms to test their systems and not just smart-contracts.
We haven't really come a long way from CleanFlicks[1] where they would take mainstream movies and edit out all the Jesus-unfriendly bits for the other flavor of 'sensitive readers'. Interestingly, that service got sued out of existence over copyright. I wonder if future AI-based on-the-fly purifiers will run into the same trouble?

1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CleanFlicks
There are nations where transferring money into and out of them with the standard systems is extremely expensive and/or can open you up to political persecution. There are other nations where it's just not realistically possible for the ordinary person.
https://archive.is/eXkMe
Where are the numbers and how do they calculate them? This article lists their cloud spend in detail then "waves hands" at the Datacenter costs simply saying "it will be far far less". Ok why not break it down?

I don't understand how they are going to achieve that. Does it include routers, switches, IPS's? What about the costs associated with having a physically wired network instead of a software defined network.

Also they state they are region redundant which is probably way overboard. Will they be protected if they lose their entire datacenter? Will they flop over to another geo? If not then you must consider not their current spend but their spend if they were single region. That would further eat into proposed savings.

Don't get me wrong, I do believe you can achieve cost parity in a Datacenter but you need a certain level of scale. I am skeptical that it can be done at $3 million in spend.
Marketing.

A canny publisher wouldn't quietly discontinue the "original" (ignoring the fact that the books have been revised before) editions. They're merely announce that they're a limited run and that stocks are running out...
You are right. From reading the article, Neal Stephenson doesn't criticize cryptocurrency in itself. His whole criticism is about integrating it inside the universe of games.

I don't agree with your opinion that item transferability is necessarily silly, though. I was happy to be able to sell the rare Dota 2 items I accumulated after playing it for a couple years. It was never a central motivation for playing, but the transferability didn't detract from the experience in any way. It just made for some nice pocket change when all was said and done.

___

Meta remark: It's pretty sad that one of the only HN comments correctly pointing out the disconnect between the article title, the HN knee-jerk reactions, and the actual content of the article, seems about to be downvoted to oblivion. The article is barely 3 paragraphs. Is it too much to ask to read it, before jumping in with the same tired crypto takes as every link to crypto-related resources on HN gets?
Whether this would work depends on the kind of system and the deadlines imposed by external needs of the company.

Does your system have a lot of (intentional or unintentional) emergent behavior, like a sandbox-heavy video game? You could end up never making a feature again.

Do your customers expect the frequent shipping of new features? Unless you can sell them on the idea of unexpected or infrequent addition of features, you could quickly lose your core audience.

However, if it is a product that no one is expecting tight deadlines on the release of new features, or the product's purpose is straightforward enough that there is no intentional emergent behavior in the system, then I could see someone running it in this way. I don't mean this in a cheeky way: there are definitely products that fit this criteria. It just won't be something that every product can reasonably do while also expecting to retain their user base.
Facebook continues to appropriate the word “open” [1], which is sad really. There are plenty of good words they and others could use instead.

[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32079558
All one has to do is evoke the Meyers vs. Nebraska 1923 SCOTUS ruling and your parental rights get restored.

Seeing this more often nowadays.

IANAL.
Or act like MySQL and define a code point as fixed to 3-bytes when choosing UTF-8 .
Blade Runner, Avatar, Ender's Game (which sucked, but still), Aliens movies/Predator movies, Edge of Tomorrow, Matrix movies, Star Trek movies. There are plenty of "not Star Wars" examples out there, some of which are extremely successful.
> Can you explain how?

By posting long tirades on Internet forums that surmise: "We have top men working on it right now. Top... men.."
Good point. This debate got the queen consort and PM of UK to speak out, I wonder if you can get them to actually speak out on the incentives that actually matter for this issue here - among them copyright. (Of course we won't see anything like that.)
An office only needs one central water/sewer connection for the bathroom and kitchen. Renovating concrete floors to add additional water/sewer connections - and renovating the main water intake and sewer lines to handle the additional volume makes office -> housing renovations more expensive than flattening the building and starting over from scratch (which is obviously horrible for the environment)
YouTube was the home of AI-generated cartoon videos for kids. Remember the whole uproar about "Elsagate"? That was more than 5 years ago!

When you say "SEO crap", you mean text search. But the world is much bigger than text search today, lots of people use YT as a search engine. Because of that, the "Front Page" of Youtube looks like dumpster fire of the worst clickbait you can imagine.
Do you have sources for this or do you have personal experience with people affected? I haven't heard this before and I'd like to know more. Sounds strange to me that considering that most of the popular books I know of targeting that age group are 3rd-person perspective.
Let me correct that for you - the systems are automated to provide plausible deniability, just like with the recent Hertz scandal. As soon as you admit there may be a problem with the automation the door is cracked open to admit a lawsuit in. It's the equivalent of "computer says", and the legal system is greased to permit such abuse.

The US doesn't have a smalltime corruption problem, you don't bribe your local cop, it has a bigmoney corruption problem as seen (again) here.
Would privacy absolutists even use BTC? I was under the impression that every transaction was out in the open and permanent.
>The cases of actual litigation with a big payout are rare, but the cases of people in paid positions meant to prevent big payouts and to make sure employees are speaking to each other and hiring people in the least risky way possible are not. That’s been a huge industry.

What does that have to do with people thinking that complaining that someone called you a "G" means you are now going to be rich? Seems completely besides the point. In fact, your whole response is.
Well, there's also a significant and growing contemporary movement based on not having conversations about the historical context of racism.
Yep, it's the same reason why I can only smirk when people tell me that crypto is the next thing for buying/selling "used" video games. News flash: The reason why you can't sell your games on Steam isnt because of tech issues...
ChatGPT can say the rules of chess it just doesn’t understand them, thus stupidly rather than ignorance.

Further if you watch the video it wasn’t moving the pieces incorrectly it was just creating them from thin air. This wasn’t like an 8 year old learning the game this was like your cat randomly hitting the keyboard.
I haven't watched the talk (yet), but I use a number of app images and they have always "just worked" and in remarkable fashion. My only complaint is that you sometimes have to write the .desktop yourself if you want it launchable through the UI, but that's a fairly trivial objection.
No, this whole issue exists only because of a whole generation of people trained to put profit over other considerations.

It was always about selling more books, not making them "better" or "less offensive"(1).

(1) the move sure seems to have offended many people.
I struggle to believe we can train a LLM the same was as a junior eng, mostly in that I’ve tried to keep a LLM as a journal of sorts and it forgets things way more than a junior does.
No court system is dragging 23 year old experts onto the stand to talk about "containerization"
Age of Empires 2

This game was released in 1998, and recently received a "definitive edition" version that updated the graphics and added a few QOL changes (modern hotkeys etc).

Never played the original, but AoE 2 has become the best game I have ever played.

I consider the game to be like chess at this point, comelltrly timeless and will still be being played 100 years from now.
Sending from US to Ukraine. I tried Wise (and WU) but the UI presented generic errors when attempting payment that didn't indicate what the problem was or how to correct it. The chat assistant was equally vague as to what the problem was.

It could've been my fault, I don't frequently send internationally. But the experience sending crypto was far and away easier and is now my default choice.
Why ironic? Honest question. I do not know enough about the career of LBJ to get it. My understanding is that he was an extremely effective legislator. A bit of a bastard, but very effective.
Crypto Has an Incest Problem