skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Because the organisation he heads is deliberately opaque on most things crypto and refuses to engage with companies like Coinbase that are trying to operate in this space.
Lol. Have you been to cities with multi-purpose zoning? Factories next to houses? It's nasty.
Engineers inventing the internet: We invented the internet

Seth: Tear forming The one in my imagination is so much better though /s
> If Coinbase claims to want to be a doctor, then by your analogy the DEA is deliberately being unclear to trap doctors. Which, lol, is something that the DEA is known to have done.

No, SEC is telling Coinbase to register the securities (aka tokens that walk like securities and quack like securities) that they are offering. Just like it's legal to sell fentanyl with proper medical and pharmaceutical licenses, it is also legal to register your tokens as security and follow all the security sales regulations. However, Coinbase doesn't like that because it cuts into their profit margins, just like the cartel doesn't like registering as a medical organization because it will limit their profits.
Hi, saurik!

Yeah, I think this is a betrayal to the public. There isn't anything open about OpenAI anymore.
Open AI has been doing sketchyish things long before Chat GPT, and I think it's something people are eventually going to notice more and more (then again people were swearing that Musk walked on water for waaaaaay too long given his actions so fuck if I know).

They're 100% marketing FIRST. I don't think they'll outright lie, but they will absolutely screw with their data in such a way to make it look waaay more impressive than it is....which is really annoying to me because they already have impressive results. Sorta like if you managed to send a ship with people on it to mars, but kept claiming you landed on jupiter.
so having another country declare a crypto as legal tender makes it no longer a security in the US?
It's even more frustrating that, from what I can tell, there is nothing published about how GPT-4 improved.

I take specific exception to the hiding of the data and techniques used to generate the model. There must be something specific going on in the model that is allowing it to perform better than GPT-3 and better than what any contemporaries are able to produce. Not publishing this information hinders the further progress of the field as a whole.
Do you have any examples of this? A corporation that owns literally nothing, whose entire value is based on something speculative (like a drug patent), and who has a traded security?
I dont see how posting trivia about the SEC's origin take away from it now being moat protecting, outdated entity. It needs to get back to what it was designed for - 20th century regulation, they are clearly showing their uselessness in the 21st.
Had one of the small metal ones come through the washing machine OK.
Any variant of a "surprising" logic puzzle forces it to latch onto the surprising answer. Like whether two pounds of iron weighs more than one pound of feathers. Or any objects. It "expects" the twist, and always answers accordingly. It does so even if you change up the objects to be less tricky.

> Which is heavier, a pound of marbles or two pounds of corn?

Both weigh the same amount, which is a total of two pounds. This might seem counterintuitive at first, but it's important to remember that the pound is a unit of weight or mass, and it always refers to the same amount regardless of what is being weighed. In this case, one pound of marbles plus two pounds of corn equals a total of three pounds, whereas two pounds of corn plus one pound of marbles also equals a total of three pounds. Therefore, both weigh the same amount of two pounds.
Chinese startup invents long-distance kissing machine
In the blog past Coinbase General Counsel asks for "guidance". The guidance for future "crypto entrepreneurs" is going to come from the outcomes of these enforcement actions.

CryptoExpert: "We want guidance. We want regulation."

SEC: "Your product/service is a security."

CryptoExpert: "No it's not!"

Damodoran called cryptocurrency "currency made by the paranoid for the paranoid." [paraphrase] Let's be honest, cooperating with the government is not high on the crypto nerd's list of priorities. The "cryptocurrency" concept seems to be based on a mistrust of government-issued currency and a mistrust of government more generally.
Static binaries and automatic code formatting (no debates on code format whatsoever) are two incredible qualities of Go that should be copied to every new language but for whatever reason are mostly left out.

And I’m not taking about “making a static binary in $LANG is easy, just follow these 7 steps…” trust me it’s nothing like Go then.
> Not disputing this, but does that mean buying forex is a security, and if not, what stops it being?.

I’m not sure the rationale (or if it is just an explicit designation), but forex (and some related derivatives) is commodity trading regulated by the CFTC rather than security trading regulated by the SEC. (I think a regulatory problem with cryptocurrency is that it is generally clearly one or the other, but not always clear which, and while the market would like crypto to be one category it is probably a messy split between the two, absent legislation defining it and assigning it as a category.)
> If the case is that the SEC just doesn't want to let them register the any of it, is there really no way they could be more straightforward? It seems like post FTX they would have a lot of leeway for this kind of thing. Unless maybe they think enforcement is a better path to lead to eventual regulation?

Part of it is political capital imo: when crypto was going up, saying "none of this is legal" costs political capital and nobody wants to listen; when it's going down and FTX is collapsing, saying "none of this is legal" is free and suddenly Congress/courts are much more partial to the message.

It's the nature of such regulatory agencies. The path to career advancement is often shouting "this is bad, we should regulate" after a disaster occurs, not before. Before the disaster, <thing> made money, and putting a stop to it is hard; after the disaster, <thing> lost people money, people are angry, so putting a stop to it is much easier.
People focus a little too much on unemployment rates. Labor participation rate is still at 45 year lows. There is a lot of people are out there not working, but focusing on the unemployment rate wouldn't make you think that.
I'm getting more of a shifty vibe from that person, so I'm not sure what to believe.
Online deployments are discussed with some frequency. Tooling is talked about. Always as a "cluster". Why do we need clusters anymore? Scaling containers, scaling functions, scaling, scaling, cluster, cluster. We suffer so much tunnel vision about horizontal scaling when it's just unnecessary anymore for most applications. The cloud products are all about horizontal.

Do you really need more than the 400 threads >12TB ram with PBs of storage found in a reasonable high end server?
SPACs are just pieces of paper sitting in Delaware somewhere.
I can't speak for Go-centric articles in general, but for this one in particular, the only one (as of now, after 14 hours of comments) bringing up Rust is this single person with (apparently) a weird chip on their shoulder.
Clever solution! Why not make it part of the startup of your binary?
That's not the full definition of murder. Here's the rest:

- 1: to kill (a human being) unlawfully and with premeditated malice

- 2: to slaughter wantonly : SLAY

- 3a: to put an end to

- 3b: TEASE, TORMENT

- 3c: MUTILATE, MANGLE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQRAfJyEsko

Watch Dominion and tell us these animals are not being mutilated, mangled, tormented, slaughtered and murdered.

Animals do not want to die. The will ALL naturally cry, scream, run, fight and generally do anything possible to avoid getting killed. Killing them is murder. Discrimination or unjustified treatment of animals based on an individual's species membership is called Speciesism. The belief that humans alone possess intrinsic value or are the central entity in the universe is called Anthropocentrism.
That's them being respectful, but make no mistake the point of the blog post is "vs"
> Fentanyl is clearly illegal to sell in the street, and this information is available and codified into law.

Fentanyl was invented sometimes around the 1960s, and cocaine at some point was prescribed liberally by doctors. Lot of new inventions are immediately not "clearly legal or illegal" from the get go. And from where I stand (and very likely, SEC stands), it is also quite clear that unregistered token sales should be illegal. If Coinbase wants to build a business on top of it, they better have lawyers ready to argue why it should be legal. Or, they can wait until there is clear laws and regulations, which necessarily evolves slower than start-ups.

Coinbase can't profit from regulatory arbitrage and then turn around and complain that there are no clear regulations. If there were, Coinbase would have much thinner margins because there would be many more exchanges doing exactly what they do but better. What is happening right now is Coinbase mistaking themselves for an "innovative tech" company when they were primarily an "innovative legal interpretation" company, and crying about the government when they got caught with their pants down.
Uh who would have registered BTC? Satoshi?
Feels like the answer to these questions is just gonna be “maybe such a case in the future will make it to the courts, and the courts will have to come up with an interpretation here.” We can make guesses about what the courts will decide but how confident are we in our guesses?
love these type of optimizations... blurhash seems to be giving me more pleasant results that thumbhash on the few examples i ran through it! thumbhash seems to over emphasize/crystalize parts of the image and results in a thumbnail that diverges from the source in unexpected ways.

either way this is awesome, and thanks for sharing
If you just exchange usd for euro that’s not an expectation of profit per se. And no one is taxed for this action.

If you’re a day trader of forex usually at the end of the day you would settle back into your default currency. Your gains from this is taxed. But usually when doing this you’re buying derivative products that are explicitly securities with maturity dates.
"Please register" is disingenuous bureaucrat speak for "get bent" in the same way that calls for "clarifications on the SEC's policies" are disingenous bureaucrat speak for "get bent".
If that was your point, then wouldn't the correct conclusion be that calls for SEC clarity are genuine, not disingenuous?

Saying "please register" when you really mean "get bent" doesn't count as SEC clarity in my book.

The SEC stonewalled Coinbase at every attempt to submit a registration. It's not like Coinbase registered and was declined.
Totally. Using Dark Sky felt a little bit like a superpower.
- Any profit comes from the efforts of a promoter or third party
Spot ETH trading is not a security, but staking ETH may be.
You can do that without ever touching the system libraries?
If a Real Estate Investment Truest (REIT), then yes.
No, this is not correct. The term "Fed Rate" is not correct or meaningful either. There are two different things - the Fed Funds Rate and the Discount Rate(also known as the Discount Window.) The Fed Funds Rate is "the rate" being discussed when the Fed raises interest rates[1][2]. The Fed Funds Rate is the interest rates banks charge each other to borrow money overnight to meet their Federal Reserve requirements. When it becomes more expensive for banks to borrow money from each other to meet their overnight Federal Reserve requirements it makes credit more expensive for both the banks and the consumers of a bank's loan products.

Banks can also borrow directly from the Federal Reserve via a facility called the discount window or Fed Discount rate[1]. Banks for a long time have avoided borrowing directly from the Fed as it has had something of stigma attached to it.[3] That has changed recently however(2007-2008.) The Discount Rate is always more than the Fed Funds Rate.

>"Every time the FED lends someone money, it basically prints it."

This is not correct either. The Fed maintains a balance sheet with assets and liabilities similar to a corporation [4]. One of those assets is money they have lent to other financial institutions. They do this by crediting or debiting the bank's account at the Fed. You seem to be confusing the Discount Rate with Quantitative Easing.

[1] https://www.investopedia.com/terms/f/federalfundsrate.asp

[2] https://www.investopedia.com/terms/f/federal_discount_rate.a...

[3] https://www.federalreserve.gov/econres/notes/feds-notes/stig...

[4] https://www.investopedia.com/terms/f/fed-balance-sheet.asp
I don't have anything valuable to add but there's no comments here, so... I just wanted to say this is cool!
Don't they raise money? Meaning that money is part of (or all of) their assets?
> I think your analogy is interesting but doesn’t the government list a scheduled of specific drugs and their classification? So applying your analogy would mean the SEC would list specific crypto on a schedule based on what type of security/commodity/exempt asset schedule they are governed by.

Yes, because all drugs that can be sold to the public have to apply for FDA approval first, and wait until their entire procedure is vetted. If you think cryptobros are willing to sit there and wait for SEC approval on their tokens that they pump and dump on the public we must be living in two different worlds.
A debugger barrier
That is pretty much the case, but I'm always taken back by how many people believe intelligence = directly replicating human thought. I thought the common consensus was instead that (artificial) intelligence was instead about mimicking enough of the process to provide the outcome. Largely because it's impossible to replicate something when we don't entirely know how it works. Major discoveries of basic aspects of the mind are still happening regularly.
An enforcement agency should make the rules it enforces very clear. The DEA does make it extremely clear which drugs are illegal which is why the cartels never need to ask.
If you can't afford the tutor, then its not really a tradeoff between chatgpt and the tutor. Its a tradoff between chatgpt and some other way to spend your time to learn a language. I suspect you'd probably advance faster through your first three months of a language spending the same chunks of time with a language learning book from the library than with chatgpt, which might very well be teaching you how to conjugate a verb in latin instead of spanish or some other error the model makes.
This app uses huge amount of coupons, discounts to attract users. Unfortunately many Chinese citizen don't care if their privacy is infringed, all they care is that they are able to save maybe 5 yuan. Baidu's CEO even made an open statement that Chinese users are willing to trade privacy for convenience. That is a very sad situation.
The only thing software engineers like more than being tracked is having their attendance tallied. Maybe they can use a punch card system to ensure nobody drinks more than their fair share of the coffee or spends too long in the bathroom etc.
The SEC is kind of relying on these appeals to authority to pile up so nobody really questions anything

Basically

A) Kraken’s staking service was a little different, but

B) Kraken didn't fight it and the CEO resigned. Jesse was just over it and not willing to fight. Jesse grandstanded against New York’s bitlicense for nearly a decade, continued Monero support in Europe while dropping it in the UK, he’s had his fight and wants to do other things with his life.

On the UK Monero stance “Unfortunately, we have to pick our battles and look out for the broader business in the country.”
You don't want to hear other reasons. There are tons of people that now work on 2-3 companies at the same time -> productivity decreased. They do all other stuff around the house and they get caught up on it -> productivity decreased. Company culture doesn't make sense anymore and teams are less connected -> productivity decreased.

There are many other reasons, not just power like people here say just because they are highly biased.
> the people that sign off on paying for it. Those people had checklists of irrelevant requirements, slow response times, almost certainly pressure to select "certain" vendors

This reads like a lack of democratic influence and even direct corruption.

That is, these "stakeholders" are not concerned that the voters would be unhappy with their performance, and would fire them (directly or through an action of a newly elected official). They seem to be conveniently shielded from feedback of the population which they nominally are hired to serve.
its already the case with el salvador and bitcoin. bitcoin wasn't really under question though for being a security so would need someone to make a smaller token legal tender
Taking a Sabbatical as a Business Owner
What about beanie babies?
"If the network on which the token or coin is to function is sufficiently decentralized – where purchasers would no longer reasonably expect a person or group to carry out essential managerial or entrepreneurial efforts – the assets may not represent an investment contract. Moreover, when the efforts of the third party are no longer a key factor for determining the enterprise’s success, material information asymmetries recede. As a network becomes truly decentralized, the ability to identify an issuer or promoter to make the requisite disclosures becomes difficult, and less meaningful.

And so, when I look at Bitcoin today, I do not see a central third party whose efforts are a key determining factor in the enterprise."

https://www.sec.gov/news/speech/speech-hinman-061418
There is a broad array of explicit exemptions from the Securities Act of 1932. Municipal bonds, for example, are not regulated by the SEC because they are explicitly exempted.

Interest bearing bank acceptances or commercial paper with maturities less than 180 days or 270 days respectively are also explicitly exempt. Since coinbase’s offering has no maturity date, and money can be withdrawn at will, my guess is that they are trying to argue that this is an exempt security. TBF, I don’t see much difference between this and a foreign-denominated interest bearing bank account.

There’s a lot of crypto==bad posting going on, and I generally agree with the crypto==bad crowd, but this is hardly a clear matter and likely needs to be taken to court to resolve. The SEC has a long history of turf wars with other regulatory agencies and regulatory overreach beyond their congressional authorization. They have lost 4 out of their last 5 Supreme Court cases related to cryptocurrency. I wouldn’t be surprised if their refusal to clarify is because they know they wouldn’t prevail in court and are trying to get away with setting precedent in the court of public opinion. It certainly looks like it’s working, judging by the opinions in this thread.
A currency being legal tender presumably has little bearing on whether the U.S. would consider it a currency. Some countries don‘t even have the concept of legal tender, while others recognize currencies they don’t issue themselves.

Being issued by a sovereign state would probably be a better test.
Isn’t most crypto marketed this way as well? To buy coins or tokens, buying in into some kind of ecosystem. You don’t necessarily make any money, 1 etc is worth 1 eth tomorrow.

You only realize any gains or losses if you sell that 1 eth and eth to usd/some other currency value has fluctuated.
In that situation, everyone knew they were junk, but the ratings agencies gave them safe ratings when mixed in with others, and so “people” had plausible deniability to pass them off onto buyers who would not know betters
not in all US states. according to [1] the US states that have passed laws making gold and silver legal tender are, as of early 2023:

AZ, IN, KS, LA, MO (pending), OK, SC, TN, TX, UT, WV, WY.

the main reason for these recent law changes appears to be so that tax can not be levied on the sale of gold and/or silver.

[1] https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/gold-and-si...
If you are buying euros as a hedge against USD inflation then you are expecting a potential of profit, or at least lowering losses.

Same with precious metals, or Bitcoin.
I would burn the politicians at the stake
but when looking at what I have to pay, I'm surprised I don't burn our politicians at the stake.
They are held in custody by Bank of NY Mellon which is basically the biggest name in the custody business. If BONY says the money is there, it is.
Securities do have to register using form S-1. This is required for IPOs, for example.
Housing isn’t an investment in a common enterprise.
The "this product is ordained by the subreddit" effect is very real
Related ongoing thread:

Coinbase issued Wells notice by SEC - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35267692
it might just mean focusing more outside of the US. they just announced expanding into Brazil yesterday for example.
Related ongoing thread:

We asked the SEC for reasonable crypto rules for Americans - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35269659
an argument like that couldn't hurt, but if North Korea declared Apple stock to be legal tender, it wouldn't make Apple stock not a security.
I would need to see proof of this. When you go to get CMBS financing, you will be asked to maintain a certain debt service coverage ratio.

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/d/dscr.asp

Every month, an outside firm asks for the financials to confirm you are meeting the DSCR, otherwise you could be considered to have defaulted (even if the loan is being paid).
Without any prior knowledge you can run my little go program on your computer.

Can that be said about your program with other people?
> Surely these scientists ... aren't so stupid as to think emergent behavior potentially resembling intelligence could result from such simple systems? It's just statistics after all.

Why is that a stupid thought? What is so preposterous about "just statistics" -- with billions of nodes, and extensively trained, producing intelligent behavior? The implicit assumption is that human brains are doing something else, or in addition.

I think that what's wrong with this view -- that there is a difference between AGI and human intelligence -- is that it conflates what your brain is doing, with what you think your brain is doing. Brains and neural nets have been trained to recognize spoken words. I'm not even talking about understanding, just producing the text corresponding to speech. We know how neural nets do this translation. Do we understand how brains do it? (I don't know, but I don't think so.) Can you explain what your brain is doing when you do speech-to-text? I doubt it.

Chess: An Alpha Zero style AI (neural net trained by playing itself) is a very good player. How do you play chess? You can probably explain how you make a move more successfully than you can explain how you translate speech to text. But how correct is your explanation? An explanation may well be your conscious mind inventing an explanation for what your unconscious mind has done.

In other words: When people compare AI to human intelligence, I think they are often comparing to intelligence plus consciousness, not even realizing the error.
GPT-4 is often overhyped and underhyped because few really understand it.

It's not a Markov Chain or a fancy text predictor. It's a ~200 layer neural network that models a vast hierarchy of concepts through language. It has emergent properties that we don't yet understand.
It's not completely meaningless.
@Dang can we please get a title change away from this clickbait? It makes Krebs look bad.

For posterity: “Chinese app included malware to gain competitive advantage”