skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It's fascinating to watch this, largely because Bitcoin has no "natural" value. The only utility it has is as a transfer of value from one place to another, and it can do that equally well with a bitcoin being worth $1 or $200.

But it's really interesting to watch the value ratchet up, and easy to see how you can do this - if people will only ever sell a bitcoin for (say) 1% more than they bought it for, and people buying things with bitcoins don't care if the things they're buying with it are priced 1% higher than they might, theoretically have been, then the price of bitcoins can keep increasing indefinitely.

Until, that is, some people decide that they want to get rid of a lot of bitcoins, and thus are willing to accept less than that, to shift them quickly. Then the price drops. And then more people might also decide to sell, so as to convert the bitcoins they have at the value they're now worth.

It's classic sentiment pricing - but without any of the value "stickiness" that you get when there's some utility to be gained from the objects you're trading.

(I'm not trying to talk Bitcoin down here, I find the whole thing fascinating. Just thinking out loud.)
errr. no there hasn't
I can't believe this is catching up
> Is it safe for me to express my belief that Bitcoin value is being manipulated by forces who intend to crash it?

Right now I expect a lot of speculation rather than manipulation for crashing. It will end up crashing bitcoin when speculators start selling, but the end goal of the croad is probably to make a quick buck rather than crash it.
How is hoodie solving / handling conflicts when its syncing local storage to the remote database ?
According to Alistair Darling the did act rather like that after the government had said it was going to bail them out.

I know they weren't literally gangsters - and as you say, we let them do it.
Can we expect an exceptional fall soon?
I presume everyone knows the birthday cake story. A small bakery allowed kids draw digitally that the bakery could print on the cake. As kids like to draw things they have seen or things they know, many drew characters of Disney. Disney made a legal move and shut down the bakery as the kids were stealing their IP.
Activists Begin the use of Drones For Surveillance
I am sceptical about your final sentence, are you talking about anything other than the broad brush data validation constraints provided by Excel? If so please give examples.
I'd also say that the other side of this is neglected, namely how to get others to listen better to you.

Those who have issues listening well are probably less likely to be looking out for advice on how to do so, so what can we do when we find ourselves needing to communicate with them?
not quite. The 21m upper limit is one variable that can't change.
BitCon: Don't
A ground-up rewrite is a sign that things have been done wrong. If your software and infrastructure are modular, you can rewrite pieces without tearing down the whole system.

Ground-up rewrites are occasionally necessary, always difficult, and often hideously political. There's no binary right answer on this question. Sometimes it's the only answer, but that's a terrible place to be.

My shortest job tenure ever (108 days in the winter of 2011-12) was in a company where I was brought in to fix the cultural and social collapse that had followed a badly-thought-out "rearchitecture" led by a 25-year-old CTO's protege who (a) was on his first real job, having burned out of college and landed in retail, and (b) didn't know what the fuck he was doing. I'm still deciding whether I should share that story, in full, with the world.
Market capitalization of a company and the bitcoin money supply are not even remotely similar.
Fun fact of the day: in Italy, this idea of "but who's REALLY behind it" is called "dietrologia", or, very literally translated, "behindology".

My theory: it's the Mayflowers.
"Why the hell would a high street bank profit from cutting of ATM or chip and pin?"

They wouldn't have profited - if they hadn't been bailed out they wouldn't be operating at all (RBS was within 2 hours of closing up shop entirely).

Read Alistair Darling's autobiography for his account of the near disaster - it's really rather alarming to read.
You can upgrade up to IE 8 on XP. What are you using?
What goes up...

The past couple of weeks has shown how easily the bitcoin market can be manipulated. People used to do this with shares. Buy up all the shares to push the price up. Then get out with a profit crashing the value of the share.

I don't think this is any different. I wouldn't be surprised if a handful of parties were responsible for the explosion in bitcoin value.

You could point to the Cyprus banking crisis perhaps as a reason for an increase in value but realistically Bitcoin is just one major hack away from being worthless again... Its like keeping your gold on a wooden shelf above a lava pit.. why anyone would put long term savings into Bitcoin right now is beyond me.
I'm not a substantial bitcoin investor, but I follow bitcointalk.org fairly actively, and there has been a fairly noticeable increase in posts about ASIC (Application Specific Integrated Circuit) solutions being a profitible means to mine Bitcoins. I don't know whether this is a driving factor, but it certainly relates to the expanding market in general.

The wide perception of Butterfly Lab's ASIC solution as being a scam has resulted in wide interest in alternatives, which are legitimized by seemingly functional and deliverable ASIC solutions by companies like Avalon. At over 6,000 Mh/S per module, they exceed the best GPU/FPGA solutions for mining almost by a almost a hundred fold (after factoring power consumption), which has produced a tangible market of bitcoin hardware.

Regardless of whether specialized Bitcoin ASIC hardware is cost effective, the production serves to legitimize the currency/producing market as a whole (as well as reinforcing the hype/gold rush mentality for miners and speculators).

I'm still not sure how/whether the currency will eventually settle, but it is very interesting to follow.
A better comparison than tulips would be silver. Tulips are a bad store of wealth (they rot, anyone can grow them, are not divisible, etc), whereas Bitcoin and silver can be stored and easily divided into smaller units. It still could be in a bubble, like silver was around 1980.

http://silverprice.org/charts/history/silver_all_data_o_usd....
Drifting with the Devil
Memory consumption is often not a major concern on modern systems, saving 50 MB or even 500 MB is seldom as important as the ability to process more requests per second.

The difference between 50 MB and 500 MB is that the former is more likely to fit in L3 cache than the latter. Ignore that difference at your peril.
Using outdated USSD technology a Finnish startup helps Tanzanian farmers farm
If they can get liquidity then you are talking hundreds of millions in profit
So how much was that first pizza worth now?
Microsoft, Nokia and Oracle file EU anti-trust over Android
The funny thing is that it didn't hit $203, or $201.12, but $200.

Whoever is driving this big buys to drive up the price is doing it at very predictable, very specific price points, across multiple currencies.

On mtgox GBP, for instance, it plateaus and peaks at very predictable values - £125, £130.

Frankly, I think that what's going on is there are a few traders (actual traders, not BTC speculators) who are driving the entire market. Hell, you can push the GBP price around just by buying or selling a few dozen BTC, the volumes are so low.

Guess what I'm getting at is that there's a hidden force behind this, and they're not dumb - but most of the speculators apparently are.
It's hard to say. There are many who justify prices far higher based on future adoption. Adoption is picking up at a remarkable rate.

The USD money supply is around $3T or $10T, depending on whether you are counting money multiplied by leverage. The US GDP is $15T. If we presume that a currency then should be on the same order of magnitude of money supply as the GDP or transaction volume, it's not hard to project a $100B+ supply of bitcoin. With the supply currently at $2B, there is a lot of room to grow. I have no idea if this analysis is reasonable, but I suspect it is close to the "story" behind the bubble.

Of course all of this presumes that bitcoin will prevail as the leading crypto-currency, regulatory hurdles will be surmounted, and the currency remains secure. Those are not implausible ifs. In fact, I'm a big believer in the future of bitcoin, even if it is getting a little ahead of itself.

I anticipate a significant collapse at some point, regardless of the success of bitcoin. That crash may very well be from $1000 to $200 though.
C++ Atomic Template: Inner workings in TBB
Most Bitcoin supporters agree that there are only two possibilities in the long run: either a fundamental flaw in the Bitcoin code or economics is discovered and the value drops down all the way to zero; or Bitcoin reaches a point of global acceptation causing the value to reach way, way above 200$.

For someone who leans towards the second outcome, they see the recent rise as a 'correction towards the true value' rather than a bubble.
It's very common for markets to peak out at psychologically important levels for a variety of reasons. In fact, I would not call this unusual at all.

Anyway, it is trading over $200 now, so it's a moot point.

I'd be more inclined to suspect bandwagon speculation than manipulation.
Www.a2zmoviez.com
A2zmoviez.com is the best choice for Hindi dubbed movies where you can get variety of movies which can exactly meet your need related to your Hindi dubbed movies.http://www.a2zmoviez.com/
>>>Really? Should we talk about $$$ manipulation?

This is the same thing by the same people is my suspicion.
I'm not sure if it can do so equally well at $1 than at $200, particularly when trying to transfer non-trivial amounts of value, due to Bitcoin's (formerly) quite limited liquidity.

I'm not sure I would have been able to purchase 100k worth of Bitcoin easily, and what would've happened to the price if I had attempted that. If I had been able to, perhaps it would've worked out in my favor.
The alternative possibility is: the amount of bitcoins kept for trade significantly outweighs the amount of bitcoins kept as an investment. Then, the price (in $) would roughly equal to the ratio of the amount of money circulating in the society over some period of time (in $) the number of available bitcoins. Thus, bitcoin would probably be worth somewhere between $100,000 and $1,000,000.
Who is a bitcoin billionaire?
> Why bash him?

*her
As a guy who has a genuine desire to work on actual software but is stuck in corporate hell while being underpaid, this rings too true for me. I spend more time gaming the bureaucratic system than I do actually coding.

The worst part is that in the country I am, software engineers don't get no respect. There's virtually no startup culture here. Companies like Google and Facebook don't hire software engineers here, as far as I know. Enterprise software is the only way to make any decent sort of living here, if you want to be programming.
What's more likely is that a lot of people set their limit sell orders to 200, because the number is easy to come up with and easy to type.
great post. I feel that history will judge history as a scam and nothing more.
It's not an official designation, obviously. It's where your bozo bit starts. If you're a Real Googler, people approach you with BozoBit := false.

Here's the Google engineering ladder:

SWE 2 (fresh college graduate)
SWE 3 (fresh PhD or 5+ years experience)
Senior SWE (manager-equivalent; first acceptable "terminal" level.)
Staff SWE (serious engineering chops)
Sr. Staff SWE (rare; candidate for Director/Principal)
Principal SWE (Director-equivalent)
Distinguished SWE
Eng. Fellow (VP equivalent)

I'd say that 5% of SWE 2-3 are Real Googlers, 35% of Senior are, and 85% of Staff are.

Real Googler means you have freedom of the castle. If you want to work on Search, you work on Search. If you want to dedicate the next 6 months to the maintenance of a module on which your work depends, you do it. It's like an open-allocation environment, and similar to what Google was before it got Too Big.

Below the Real Googler Line, you actually sweat performance reviews because your manager can unilaterally reduce your credibility to zero. Above it, projects and managers compete for you. There's probably some room for play (when you're slightly above RGL, you might still worry) but it has a binary feel to it. When you're a Real Googler, you have independent credibility. You don't sweat Perf.

Traditionally, the RGL was the Senior SWE tier. That was the level at which you were trusted to choose projects, and even manage if it were needed.

You're expected to make Sr. SWE in 3 years from SWE 3 and 5 years from SWE 2. If you don't, it's like being denied tenure and your project options (which probably weren't great, since 99% of getting promoted is getting on the right projects) continue to decline.

If you have Real Googler credibility, you can get away with a lot. There are people who start strong and get promoted, then go along for 3+ years without committing any code before they get fired. That's what RG gets you: a 3-year audit cycle. On the other hand, if you're not above the RGL, while it's not technically speaking hard to stay employed, it's extremely competitive to get into a position where you can have a real impact.
Genuine question, have you ever been to San Francisco?
At the original price of 10,000 Bitcoins, it would be presently worth 1,880,000 USD.
Gold also has no "natural" value as a currency, and make no mistake gold is traded as a currency, not for it's actual usage.
>>>desperately enough to spend millions on inflating a bubble

Millions is pocket change to those who deal with figures in the hundreds of billions.
I know an accountant who knew how to use word processors but preferred to write essays in Excel. It's definitely peculiar.
>if I could get some Linux distro to run on there perfectly, yea, it'd be an awesome piece of hardware.

Although I have not actually run a high-DPI display, things I have read tell me that no suite of Linux desktop software is ready for high-DPI displays the way that OS X and ChromeOS are. (The problem is tiny text and tiny UI elements. Some elements can be easily made the right size, but that right size ends up being inconsistent with other elements.)

Desktop Linux users are used to waiting for new hardware to become supported by Linux, and high-DPI displays seem to be an instance of that.
> ... the cost of domain names involving monkey puns would skyrocket. But such is the price of progress.
I would like to tell a story about a small part I played in this game once.

I was working for a network equipment manufacturer, let's call them Acme Routers, and I was visiting a medium sized residential ISP in a EU country. The reason I was visiting this ISP was because they wanted us to develop a feature for them to "trap-and-trace" their residential internet subscribers. In the industry we call this "lawful interception" and it's how the government snoops on people. Acme Routers didn't want to develop this feature and we were making a display of showing how difficult it would be for us and how much it would cost us. We wanted guarantees that they would purchase more from us if we developed this feature.

It was only during the actual meeting that I realized the ISP didn't want this feature either. No one wanted to deal with this feature. The ISP didn't want the hassle and added expense and Acme wanted to spend time on features that would make us more competitive. But the ISP needed this feature in order to be compliant with their laws. They would face penalties if they could not give law enforcement access to their subscribers.

If Acme decided not to make this feature the ISP would just pick another vendor. So we developed the feature for them.

The moral of the story is that technical people don't always get to decide the direction of technology. It's policy makers and their penalties that sometimes force technical folks into developing things they would rather not. There is no getting around the law as an operator if you wish to remain an operator for long.

" The world is run by men who use laws for tools." -- Talib Kweli

So we have to change the law, because that's the only way we can remove the tools of evil men. As technologists we want to think there is a technical solution to this dilemma, but there isn't. The only way to prevent technology from being used as a tool of oppression is to change the law so it cannot be used in such a way. And if we cannot change the law then we must change those wielding it, through peaceful means if possible and violent means if necessary.

Education plays a primary role here. As a technologist other people look to you for interpretations of our modern world and technology. Lead them by example and explain your actions along the way. Educate those around you about issues relating to technology and ethics. We take for granted just how many people there are who don't know anything about these issues. They might care about it but they are truly ignorant of the issues. Fix that. Let's make the term technologist synonymous with a person who understands ethics and technology.
مشاهدة مباراة ريال مدريد وجالطة سراى بث مباشر
Can't purchase through them, but very comprehensive flight search can be found at http://matrix.itasoftware.com/
True, if you're wanting to transfer £100,000 then you're out of luck unless there's an awful lot of liquidity.

But then people don't seem to be making transfers that large, last I checked.
The truth of Rule #1 is burning into my memory by hot water. I'm aware that JavaScript libraries these days can do also sorts of cool tricks. Menus can drop and fade in, rotating while at it. Navigation can be done with a 3D sphere! But the reality is that you have maybe 5 seconds of my attention when I land on your site to see if the content interests me, and if those 5 seconds are spent trying to wrestle with your whizzy controls then I don't even know what you were trying to say before I go onto the next site.
> I had the wrong ciphers configured. After some quick tweaking and a confirmation using openssl s_client -connect server:ip

Is this in the nginx config? Can anybody elaborate a bit further? Here is what I am currently using in my nginx config for ssl:

ssl_session_cache shared:SSL_CACHE:8m;
ssl_session_timeout 5m;

# Mitigate BEAST attacks
ssl_ciphers RC4:HIGH:!aNULL:!MD5;
ssl_prefer_server_ciphers on;
Monkeys are not apes and vice-versa

http://science.howstuffworks.com/zoology/mammals/monkeys-vs-...
Drugs dealers typically use a large amount of cash, but that hasn't produced a pervasive stigma about physical currency in the US. So I don't think users will necessarily be dissuaded by reports of criminal use.
Where I come from, an engineering-centric company is like a waiter-centric restaurant - it just doesn't exist.
The formula that works for me, a 10-year telecommuter:

Make people aware of your office hours, and always keep them. This means always starting on-time, taking lunch on-time, and hopefully ending on-time. Anytime in between is fair game for phone calls and Skypes, although of course we want to not distract someone who is getting something done. Any deviations from the agreed-upon schedule are no different from a commuter being AWOL. Don't do it without prior notice.

Skypes get acknowledged and replied to within 0-10 minutes, depending on whether I'm getting something out of my head and into the editor and therefore cannot answer you (or getting something out of somewhere else in the bathroom). But they do get answered promptly. E-Mail gets checked hourly or less (personal preference for me, but I don't permit e-mail to interrupt my workflow).

Also it's nobody's damn business where I'm working from, and unless I'm very comfortable with you, as far as you know I'm working in a quiet home office. Not very many clients ever know I'm using LTE from (sailboat, beach, back of a moving Honda), and they don't need to, because it can be important to maintain the illusion that I too am rotting in a cubicle, not having more fun than they are.
Are you saying that someone has cornered the bitcoin market?
Actually it's natural value is related with the power usage to mine these things.
As the difficulty goes up and payouts go down, the natural value increases. Regardless of demand
> Utterly untrue. You have no idea what you're talking about.

Just six words: "right to work", "at will employment".
Out on the tiles
Not to mention that thing about guns.
I have a similar experience. This thing has replaced an Xtremer Ultra box running XBMC on an atom cpu, and despite the slow start, it is still better than a dedicated htpc (one remote). Plus the plex software is working adequately. Sure not the best experience ever, but for the price, it has been a confortable experience. (added bonus: 3D with passive glasses).
Yeah, but that still basically says "Rank Amateurs", because you should never pick the psychologically obvious point, as otherwise you'll end up in the sell queue behind a gazillion others. Always best to go in a few points below the obvious level for your sell, and a few points above the obvious for your buy.

If you look at any "real" market, prices rarely adhere to nice round sticking points, because people are at least trying to second guess what the other guys are doing, rather than just acting as though they're the sole person in the market.
I wasn't sure who the author of the post was -- surprised to find out now: Karl Denninger is an American technology businessman, finance blogger, and political activist, sometimes referred to as a founding member of the Tea Party movement. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Denninger
Great post. Would be nice as long as natural selection worked so that really awesome startups would thrive.
I've been able to vote for quite a long time, and never did so out of principle (in a country where 80%+ of the population votes, very much unlike the US).

I actually think the need of surveillance for a number of nations (in particular Syria, which has been the target of widespread disinformation, slander and lies lately) is perfectly legitimate and I deem this opinion perfectly reasonable considered my general worldview. I put away childish things a long time ago.

Where being screwed over is concerned, I'm fairly familiar with it and as nothing always goes the way I pray it won't, I feel entitled to a bit of vaguely legitimate retribution.
It's widely unpopular, especially on a site such as HN where the average Joe has the mind-openness of a witch's tit (whatever the whole hacker/geek ethos might suggest), but I gave away popularity when I started socializing with anything else than cats.
In order to broadcast on a frequency in an area, you need an FCC license to do so. This is usually acquired by private sale approved by the FCC.

Once you have that license, you can require the cable companies serving that area to redistribute your channel -- in which case you don't get paid. OR, you can forbid them from carrying your channel, or you can negotiate a deal. That deal is a retransmission fee, and is based on the assumption that having the channel is worth something to the cable company.

If most of your content is from a national franchise (ABC, NBC, CBS, Fox, whatever TBS turned into and Univision), your remaining content -- local news -- is the entirety of your value to the cable companies. The national content can be negotiated with the parent franchise, either by carrying a remote station or by carrying a national feed like Fox News.

About 60% of US households have cable subscriptions. That's more than 60% of the population.
Usually known as the "Glorious Revolution":

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glorious_Revolution

Then there was the earlier Civil War where parliament fought a war to remove (and eventually execute) a king long before the French has a similar idea:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_Civil_War
That would drive me bananas ...