skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Overly provocative title. But QV seems interesting. I found qv.geek.sg and quadraticvote.co as webapp implementations. qv.geek.sg is a little sleeker/more Strawpoll-like, here's an "election" I made for choosing the best number: https://qv.geek.sg/vote?election=c0af9b87-8e5f-488c-87dd-960...
Looks nice but pretty expensive as well. 1500 pounds for a keyboard has got to be good!
Always Inverse Cramer
I didn't make it available on web because it would be hard to monetize it (happy to be corrected if I'm wrong on this).

I'm working as an indie game dev full-time so making money is high on priorities.
This exchange was more enjoyable than I anticipated it to be.

> I created this with vi and used 1,$s/ /:/g

> Because, I really am an old C hacker at heart.

%s/ /:/g would have been shorter.
Long term fixed income at near 0 percent interest when you might have to give the money you used to buy it back is very risky, as we see here.
> I have great sympathy for your argument, and agree with the gist of it.

I'm not making an argument. I'm stating the current status quo of the US. No argument was ever made here about whether I think it's right or wrong.

>That's not true. Many central banks have lots of regulations on them. However, they are not regulated by the kind of competition you outlined above.

It is true. The central bank is overall unregulated because the central bank IS the regulator. In the same way a government is unregulated so is the central bank. In the US the central bank is more or less the fourth branch of the government.

You're talking about "many central banks." while I'm simply talking about the Federal reserve in the US. I think you're mistaken, I'm not making a general statement about how central banks across the world works.

>For one, loaning money to banks is only one part of what the Fed does. They also outright buy and sell assets (eg in open market transactions). In many instances, the banks (technically) lend money to the Fed by having positive account balances at the Fed.

This is true. However one of the primary ways they influence the money supply is through interest rates. Interest rates are also one of the triggers of the SVB bank run.

>For a contrasting example on how interest rates don't need to be the focus of monetary policy, have a look at the Monetary Authority of Singapore. Instead of using interest rates as a channel to communicate and effect their monetary policy, they use the exchange rate of the Singapore dollar to a basket of foreign currencies. Crudely, instead of 'setting' the interest rate, they 'set' the exchange rate.

They don't need to be, but they ARE quite central in the US. Additionally given how the US dollar is sort of the central peg of all other currencies, the US would rather the Dollar remain the Rate at which all other currencies are set against. That way the US in a way indirectly and collectively controls the worlds monetary value.

I didn't offer any opinions in my initial reply. I'm simply stating what's going on in the US about the nature of the reserve ratio and how it doesn't matter when applied to SVB. It seems you're trying to make an argument here against one I never made?
This is only the model code which defined the shape and how to do a forward pass.

It isn't the training code, but it would be unlikely that the model code used then is any different.
The Mathematics of Crowds: How Pedestrians Inadvertently Self-Organize
Seriously?

There is so much (possibly delicious) yuck in the world . . .

https://www.cnn.com/travel/article/casu-marzu-worlds-most-da...

I remember reading a recipe in a fancy cookbook for rotten songbirds, but can't find that.

https://www.atlasobscura.com/foods/ortolan-bunting-france
does anyone have a list of venture debt firms exposed to this SVB collapse, like PFG which I believe had a close relation with SVB?
In that context no it’s the same thing. It’s profitability and balanced books (liabilities matching assets) that are different. A business can be profitable and insolvent if cash flow temporarily dries (e.g. you can’t hold employee salaries because customers take too long to pay invoices). A viable business needs both profitability (long term) and cash flow/solvability (short term).

Unmatched assets and liabilities (like FTX) is not insolvency, it’s fraud, and mechanically causes insolvency when the cash is gone after the run.
more like experienced fraudsters. madoff was able to keep his scheme going for far too long i.e. multiple decades
Banks were not offering any interest on deposits at this time. Maybe you could find .2% if you looked hard
Kind of a strangely flippant article. By the end I was annoyed at the author’s tone and dismissiveness of Arnold.
Is this keyboard essentially a slave device? For some reason I just imagine a Lisp Machine keyboard as being programmable independent of the host machine. Maybe I'm just different but I still prefer the ergonomics of the split keyboards that arrived later for PC's.
notice how this case (OP) is not in a workplace, and happened once, meanwhile the pronoun case is in a workplace, and a repeated pattern of behavior

there’s a difference between telling your neighbor to fuck off and your manager intentionally constantly harassing you at work then firing you for it
I mean objectively the bank bet that interest rates wouldn't go up, they took a massive unhedged position in exactly that.

I hope the bank thought it was betting, because if they didn't realize they were betting on interest rates staying low then that is a shocking level of incompetence. They probably thought it was a safe bet, but it was a bet nonetheless with obvious risk if they were wrong.
This didn't happen all of a sudden -- it took place over months! Sure, now it's a pickle, but it didn't turn into a pickle from one day to the next.
now .89

there are no freebies in finance. no one knows what is left. probably less than many think.
I likely won’t ever get around to building this, but I feel strongly a genealogy/family media focused web app would be so useful. Scan and upload old photos, maybe have ai upscale and clean the, up, let your family tag the various old people in each photo.

I have started asking my family to give me all of the old physical pictures we have so I can scan and upscale them. But then there’s no good place to share and tag them all for a large family.
> The advantage of the government is that it is rather difficult for it to ignore you. If you exist, you pay taxes type "you won't be ignored."

No, the Government has a long track record of successfully ignoring people who have hard to solve problems.[1]

> ...we legislate so that companies are required to do business with individuals who are making fraudulent use of their services

I suppose instead of just canceling your account and you losing your email, you could get arrested and charged. Or more likely end up having to use facial recognition[2] administered by a third party which is incapable of verifying people. If you think going to the Social Security Administration to have a paper card printed for you is bad, wait until you have to go to have your password reset...

Or we can legislate Google, Apple and co that if someone holds an account with them and is banned they are entitled to a human led review process, possibly by a third party or other group. We can legislate that if you're a customer in good standing, they have to have human support available. Does this mean they might be more stingy with "free" services? Probably - that isn't a bad thing. Most people take offense to Walmart moving in to areas, taking a loss for a year or two to steal customers and close local stores and then jacking up prices. I don't understand why we're ok with big tech getting a pass to do the same thing digitally.

[1]: https://www.grandforksherald.com/newsmd/va-audit-finds-thous...

[2]: https://www.foxbusiness.com/economy/irs-facial-recognition-s...
HN is much worse than many sub-reddits. Look at the belligerent ignorance on display not just here, but that which is demonstrated by the VCs who seem to collectively lack a sufficient knowledge of finance and other things. The decline in quality is evident here, and it doesn't stack up well compared to places where people mostly know what they are talking about.
Let’s say I owe $100.

If I have assets worth $110 today but they are locked up, and I have to pay back what I owe today, then I’m facing a liquidity crisis.

If I have assets worth $90 today, but $110 in a few years, and I have to pay back the money I owe in a few years, then I’m solvent and everything is good.

If I have assets worth $90 today, but $110 in a few years, and I have to pay back what I owe today then I’m insolvent.
There is no need to invent new regulatory methods when the one we have is perfectly sufficient: if somebody can prove your AI model is tainted with unlicensed works, regardless of how you acquired them, then your model as a whole is an infringing work and the affected party can sue you for damages far exceeding the pennies of utility you gained from the action. Your stock prices tanks, your corporate customers cease to purchase your models and you go bankrupt.

It's exactly like the current regime of copyright where I could, in principle, copy paste a file from the Linux kernel and compile it into my binary application, and nobody would know. How much would a single file from a work with tens of thousands of contributors possibly be worth, right? Wrong, it takes a single disgruntled employee (which you are guaranteed to have when you exceed a headcount of roughly 5) to destroy your business and product. The only possible way to avoid this is to train on either public/open sources or get positive authorization for each and every file you slurp for the specific use of AI training, which you definitely won't get for pennies.

As for the inevitable dominance of our AI overbrains fed on open source information, I for one, welcome them. The cat is out of the bag, it's not like we can return to the previous state of affairs. The problem, as always, becomes a political one, how to distribute the fruits of these new technical capabilities to the (human) citizens.
In the US, it takes 24 business hours to transfer money, sometimes less. Payroll is easy as you know the exact amount and it's on a precise schedule set months in advance.

Additionally, there is at least one person at the company whose full-time job is to handle this. Making a transfer every Tuesday or Wednesday or whatever is well within a workload. When I say "sitting in checking" I quite obviously mean more than two weeks by "sitting".

Also, I was mostly referring to series-A startups that have, for example, single digit millions in the bank. Keeping that all in checking is dumb. Larger companies that are moving millions each week can afford to have special arrangements with their bank or banks to limit liability independent of FDIC. A line of credit, perhaps, that is paid off a week or three later, secured by a bundle of securities held at the same institution, for example. I'm fairly sure a bank run can't touch those.

There are so many possible solutions to this problem.

Maybe it's because I've been burned hard by banks before, but I'll never trust them to not do precisely what SVB did here (in some fashion). Everything's great until it isn't.

EDIT: Engineers making $200k isn't $200k in cash comp, either, FYI. (And anyone with 500 of them has more than one bank account already.)
Perhaps I wasn't clear. With the rising inflation and interest rates and deteriorating economy people lose their jobs and can't pay their mortgage. My point, and why I thought the line was funny in that article, is that the way SVB failed isn't the only way that banks can fail. Moreover, Tech is currently in a massive round of layoffs and if this spreads to the general economy (which I think it will) then holding large loan balances could become a problem for the banks.
Thanks for clarifying about the treasury part. I thought treasury (or the US Govt) had instructed federal reserve to freeze assets of Russian entity.

> But not technically true for gold coins

In so far as gold is used as money one is indeed relying on rest of humanity/society to accept it in exchange for whatever you need. Granted that for most (all?) of their existence, civilised humans have accepted gold as money because of its use as jewellery and its attractive qualities. But there's still a possibility that some tribe/community will refuse to accept gold as money as they don't have any use value of it.

In my mind, money is a promise or a contract which says here's a "thing" I'll give you in exchange for goods or services. The other party could always walk away from that contract or decide to not honour that promise.

Gold/cattle etc., have worked as money because they have an intrinsic use value which one could fall back to if it stops working as money.

Which brings me to the next point.

> ..or bitcoin.

I could never understand the intrinsic use value of Bitcoin. People think of it as store of energy or whatever but what is the intrinsic use of Bitcoin? ETH at least is used as a currency to get work done on Ethereum chain so that is its intrinsic use value.
A few days ago, there was a link that came by here about Agnes Callard, a philosopher who left her husband for one of her grad students. Both are well written pieces and worth reading. This article makes me think of that one because it feels like the two subjects are exactly opposite people. Both had failed marriages, but one's reaction was an almost absurd degree of navel gazing, and the other's was an absolute lack of it. Both are clearly very smart people, but one speaks almost too plainly, and the other is, well, a philosopher. It's fun to compare them.
> At some point in my programmer career I figured out that optimizing for human comprehension, a.k.a. "clean code", is a valid goal.

I fully agree that human comprehension should be a prime objective for code. Alas, following the tenets of “Clean Code” produces anything but that.
In addition to this I think picking problems that you don’t immediately know how to solve but is within your wheel house is important. Also sticking with a single problem or domain. Constantly starting and never completing things doesn’t expose you to the next iteration of challenges.
Well, Intel, Apple and Microsoft, to name a few, have (nearly) always been profitable. But isn't VC supposed to invest in things that are likely to return a profit? There's some risk, which is offset against the ROI, but I don't see a good reason to invest in companies that run a loss.
He behaves like a compromat. If they didn't investigate him, it would constitute dereliction of duties.

This s hardly a new phenomenon. After WW2, lots of americans colluded with Russia. Difference of course was that then it was the far left, and now it's the far right. Shouldn't change how they handle it.
Ask HN: How does UPI settlement failures affect banks or customers?
Read a good article about UPI from here long while back: https://blog.setu.co/articles/upi-103-the-settlement

The above is the explanation to inter-bank settlement processes. This is a 3-part article and links to the other parts are available therein. It gives a nice overview of UPI as implemented by NCPI in India.

My question is what constitutes a settlement failure? How does this affect customers and banks?

In my personal experience, sometimes payments can take up to 3 days to succeed. Is it anything to do with inter-bank settlements?

Or is it that the sheer volume of such incomplete or delayed payments actually constitutes inter-bank settlement failures?

RBI also has introduced CDBC to address the problem of settlements. But I'd like to understand settlements is a problem first, before I understand how CDBC will help with settlements.
They might have bet a million dollars on it, but if their normal short position is also around a million dollars, then I am not as impressed.

If they wanted to show everyone how smart they were, I expected a quote something like: "We were so confident in our analysis that we invested 10x our normal short position in it!"
> terrorists

Right, honking horns and blocking roads is pretty much the same as setting off bombs and murdering people for political ends.
I'm getting 56.38 ms per token on my 32GB M1 Max using this code on the 7GB model.

Very usable!
Wouldn't the FDIC take an enormous loss if it facilitated selling SVB "insanely cheap"?
That was a wonderful and nuanced portrait. Very much enjoyed reading.
Ethereum transaction fees just did a 10x as people are rushing to move DAI and USDC positions.
Just gotta keep the goats off the panels (a real problem!)
MessageNotUnderstood Film
Blowing horns is a violent crime? No, wait. Donating to people blowing horns is a violent crime?
The second clip with Ben Stein (?!) being as confidently wrong as a person can be is hilarious.
You identified the root cause of this whole thing. Long-term bonds get preferential treatment in the risk-based capital calculation because they have low default risk, which allows banks to run with thinner equity capital, even though they're exposed to high interest rate risk and have a portfolio highly concentrated in one high-risk industry. Capital ratios don't adequately account for actual risk.
Probably because classic Carbonara does not include cream. Including cheese is normal on the other hand.

So, yeah, it's not perfect but it's close to being reasonable.
Tbh it does seem he was bit naive of what he was doing at the time and of the consequences. He wasn’t just some rando out there cracking software for personal use - he should’ve expected the government would be going after and throwing the book at people like him. It’s puzzling he didn’t take security more seriously or just stopped doing it entirely earlier.

The shocking part for me though was reading about how he was put with violent offenders and experienced being sent to “the hole”. Like what the fuck? Does the federal prison system not separate white collar criminals from high security prisoners? Honestly insane.
His politics and the Atlantic's are at odds.

He's far from perfect, but what he's accomplished in the US as a kid from Austria . . . absolutely amazing. Over and over.

If the US Constitution didn't prevent it, he'd surely be President. (And I'm from his political antipode.)
Paywall w/ blur filter.
> The biggest reason why Australia hasn't moved to STV or mixed member for the House of Representatives, is that doing so would benefit smaller parties at the cost of the bigger ones.

Where the evidence for that claim? More likely is that there's no impetus for change, at the least, and quite possibly no interest in it given people's feelings about how the Senate is voted and the proliferation of smaller parties there.
If someone says "Hey, you shouldn't use that term, it's impolite." what more //content// is there to give? And what "irony" are you talking about?

And this post https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35083720 is not even remotely a riddle. You said the origin of the term. They pointed out that the term has changed, and the person using the term wasn't using that definition anyway.

Even with it being the proper term for "non-aligned [in the cold war]", the person using the term wasn't saying non-aligned [in the cold war].
Business Nano Dimension Launches $1.1B Takeover Bid for Stratasys
Assuming USDC is backed by the money it says it is, then it going to zero is incredible news for anyone who buys it post de-peg right? If the assets are there, and you buy USDC at 5c on the dollar, you’ll make 95c even if USDC has to entirely liquidate?

I guess, assuming the assets are there, I don’t see why/how it would drop below that, or be finished, other than some volatility due to panic
It's not helping that you are constantly hijacking threads which are really only tangentially related to promote your app.

As far as the website premise itself, I feel like this might've been useful 20 years ago when it was more popular to write static vanilla HTML with jquery sprinkled in. These days, if a person wants a relatively no code solution they're gonna go for WordPress or square space, otherwise they're probably going to design something using a framework such as react svelt or vue.
It’s not as funny when the real world is crazier than the parody show. See also what happened to Veep.
Hi GAS,
I'd be interested in being included, though looking at the past interviews I might not have enough interesting gear. I move a couple times a year so I have to stay lean. A Focusrite, and a $100 AKG mic is my setup. When it comes to recording vocals, I mainly do them in my car in any empty parking lot I can find late at night. Haha, it's funny but that's how I recorded my last EP. You can check it out at http://jpeckmusic.com/
I wish EV makers would publish stats on what happens when the battery is nearly dead.

Some EV's can still drive, but with a reduced range.

Other EV's pop up a light on the dashboard and won't drive at all.

When buying an old vehicle with a dying battery, it really matters which is the case, because typically it won't be worth replacing the battery.
I don't think Casey would object to "optimizing for human comprehension". If you are willing to give up an order of magnitude of performance, you can probably just do it without much care.

I agree that "optimizing for human comprehension" is a worthy goal, but it is very hard to actually know what is easiest for humans to understand. I don't think that guidelines like "clean code" actually are particularly effective at making understandable code. My personal guideline is to prefer code which is "simple" for both humans and computers.

> So by default, I follow Knuth's advice that premature optimization is the root of all evil. I write clean code but go into Casey mode when the numbers justify it.

I hold the controversial opinion that Knuth's advice is not relevant to most modern programmers. Most modern programmers have never done the "optimization" that Knuth was referring to in 1974. Optimizing only the hotspots of your program is very relevant technique, but if you write terribly performant code everywhere, there won't be significant hotspots. Everything will be lukewarm.
Every bank in existence fundamentally borrows short-term at a low, floating rate, and lends back out long term at a higher rate. The lending rate can be fixed or floating.

This kind of thing is bank risk management 101. For example, in Europe, banks tend not to lend out long term at all at a fixed rate, precisely for reasons like this.

Broadly this is called "duration marching" IIRC, duration being the name of sensitivity to interest rates. Ideally a bank would have no duration risk - they don't care if rates are going up or down. You can achieve it with a variety of tools: IR swaps, issuing long-term deposits/bonds, floating rate loans etc.

You're right, if SVB in 2021 just bet the farm that interest rates will stay so low for a decade, this is basically moronic.
Here's another controversial opinion:

It's the genius programmers who write the shittiest code. In my experience clean code tends to be a waste of time for geniuses because shitty code isn't really a problem for smarter people.

The further away you are from genius the greater the tendency for you to write cleaner code because you need it in order to deal with the complexity.

What's common among HN readers is that they think they're smart. So you may be reading this and thinking "Wait a minute, this isn't true! I'm smart and I like clean code!". Well, I hate to break it to you. The truth hurts because most likely one of those two attributes probably doesn't actually describe you.

Also as a side mention, I'm a clean code Nazi. My code is really clean.
I had the same impression. He didn't quote anything intelligent that Arnold said. I don't believe Arnold is that shallow. Or maybe Arnold simply didn't find the author worth the effort.