skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> There's no crypto code in Bitcoin that was invited by Satoshi and could have been badly broken in a subtle manner.

Read up on the history of the client. Satoshi was innovative but could certainly not code securely to save themselves. Most of the script OP codes are still disabled because they introduced huge vulnerabilities. You could spend anybodies coins in Satoshi's client, or create integer overflows that created billions of coins in a transaction.

The client is a lot better now, but to say it's perfect because it was there from inception is a huge mistake.
Many survival strategies are hard-wired.
You pay for transactions. Don't tell people what to do with their money. Most of the transactions wouldn't be mixed at all. Just using new addresses with small balances is good enough for daily purchases. Mixing is needed only in certain cases like before and after big consolidating transactions.

CoinJoin is nice too, but it does not look well in the eyes of "anti-structuring" laws.

Shared wallet is an FBI honeypot unless proven otherwise (which is impossible to do). The best way is to have as big pool of random nodes as possible participating in the laundering. Like with Tor: the more users join it, the safer you are from some malicious entities.
Design it to look like my shit
The article was not about the technology, but about the ability for Google to unilaterally affect the ability for the Chinese government to surveil their population.

The premise relies on Google being irreplaceable to the Chinese economy.

We are gambling with Google’s stack that
they are big enough and important enough
that the Chinese authorities would not
dare block it in mainland China completely.

However, that isn't supported by the data - Google's market share. If Google did something which the government truly objected to, such as offering encrypted proxies (which encrypted search is), then they could block the entire domain and only affect the portion of their population that uses it.

Market share is a good proxy to measure that population, and it's 3%.

I'm not convinced that 3% is large enough to cause the government to give up.
Forklet: Editable Web Snapshots
He'll still have to provide ID documentation to get on the plane (and I think also to book the flight, under the TSA Secure Flight program) so in practice the government doesn't lose any information here. It might raise suspicion, but he doesn't gain any anonymity.
Experienced start-up weekenders: did you actually start a company afterwards?
This is largely academic posturing, which is the case with a lot of critical theory. Pinker makes it clear throughout Better Angels that his working definition of violence is limited to the physical kind. He's also adamant that his choice of topic is not an endorsement of any specific moral hierarchy, and if you read the book, you would know the tone is not entirely self-congratulatory, but often somber and introspective.

What this article claims is Pinker's "exercise of circularity" slash discursive violence is merely a sin of omission: because Pinker chose not to make his book about modern problems, the author jumps to the conclusion that he is partly responsible for these problems.

By this logic: Yesterday I didn't have a single conversation about inequality or racism—I guess that makes me complicit! That strikes me as kind of absurd, I don't know about anyone else.
Which only proves my point. It's really hard to make it right in v0.1 and you have to make it right, otherwise the whole thing is forever broken. Even then, there were two huge bugs: one with integer overflow that created billions of bitcoins in one transaction. Another was with OP_RETURN that allowed to spend bitcoins from any transactions without any effort.

Bitcoin wins over more complex schemes because it has less moving parts. Fortunately, the parts that were enabled work fine and give us awesome possibilities. Otherwise, they'd be disabled too.
He does mention Zerocoin. His argument is that when using it, your intent to hide your transaction history is explicit, while with the proposed "mixing" you supposedly can't tell it from regular transactions.
There is functionality for doing polls once you hit a certain karma threshold.
I think this is something of a chicken and egg problem. The basic firewall UI is allow <computer> to use <port> for <incoming|outgoing>. This interface can be made very easy to use. The problem is that if this was the default then programs would simply not work, and users would not know why.

However, if it became standard, then programs would tell users to check their firewall, and can even tell users the information that they need to fill into the firewall (eg. name of computer, port, ...).

Conceivably, you could define an protocol for devices to request an opening. This protocol could include a way of sending the password.
Not sure where the controversy is coming from, given that admin clarification from 11-14-2013 said,
"You could modify an existing product to integrate with Salesforce and submit that, however you'd be judged on just that component, not the pre-existing product."
It is possible to brute force some Bitcoin addresses,
What happens if a user changes client machines?

You seem to suggest storing their hashed password in the browser, but if they change machines they won't have that hashed password around. How will you go from plaintext password to hashed password without having the salt used with PBKDF2?

You say user passwords are never sent over the wire (not even the hash)[1], but then say users have an object containing their hashed password (is the documentation here out of date?)

[1] - https://github.com/cryptic-io/web
It can actually be interpreted in two ways. I feel that passion for a particular domain is very important. May be what he meant was that their culture and mentality would be the same regardless of the product. This shows strong commitment towards building something!

On the other hand, if he genuinely meant that they will just build stuff for the heck of it, regardless of the domain they are in, then it's a bit impassive for a person in the startup world. From a businessman's perspective, it's all about whether or not you build some product. From a techie's perspective, it's all about whether or not you build the right product. So in retrospect, may be he shouldn't have said that to an interviewee during an interview.
I'm starting to get sick of these Bitcoin posts.
I develop and all my hobbies use a computer. I should really get out more!
Thank you. I truly appreciate your kind words.
A shared wallet, not the "shared wallet" service. Many services use them internally, they're in no way a trap.

> CoinJoin is nice too, but it does not look well in the eyes of "anti-structuring" laws.

Neither is a system that flings around your wallet contents all the time.
So who's going to be the first to start sending bogus data to LG's endpoints?

Could do some very fun things to their statistics.
Here's a Microsoft Research paper on a very similar idea, from 2011: http://research.microsoft.com/apps/pubs/default.aspx?id=1502...
KKK Member Walks up to Black Musician in Bar
8-10h
The numbers for this, sadly (or gladly, for holders of bitcoin), don't work out. Even if you had the most powerful supercomputer in the world and could try trillions upon trillions of keys per second, you'd need, on average, more than the current age of the universe to brute-force the key.

From: http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/22/is-it-possible...

In order to spend money sent to a Bitcoin address, you just need to find a ECDSA public key that hashes to the same 160 bit value. That will take, on average, 2 ^ 160 key generations.

Supposing you could generate a billion (2 ^ 30) per second, you need 2 ^ 130 seconds.

Doing this in parallel using a billion machines requires only 2 ^ 100 seconds.

Getting a billion of your richest friends to join you gets it down to only 2 ^ 70 seconds.

There are about 2 ^ 25 seconds per year, so you need 2 ^ 45 years.

The age of the Universe is about 2 ^ 34 years so far—better get cracking!
8 hours at work.
4 more hours when I get home.

So 12 hours.. wait.. I don't sleep for 12 hours a day.... hmm.. better make that 16 hours!
I don't understand.

I think I finally do. For a long time I would see posts like GP's on 4chan and wonder if someone is really making them with a straight face unironically, or if it's part of some master troll orchestrated by a grand ruseman. For a while the grand ruseman theory seemed more believable, but seeing a normal person make such a comment on HN makes me think that perhaps most such posts are really made by normal people which, perhaps paradoxically, actually restores a bit of my faith in humanity. I mean, compared to the idea of people with nothing better to do than orchestrate stupid posts on 4chan of all places.
A number of other people don't like to argue at all, or if they argue it's only to make people they care about feel good. They usually just let their opponent win, although sometimes after putting up enough resistance to make their opponent think it was a good fight.
This reminds me of a game I built a long time ago:

http://www.ryan-kahn.com/static/onlyCSS/

I ended up building a generator for the CSS+HTML and at the time I had a PHP script (2+ years ago, I would use Node now) that could allow me to pick the number of lanes, the difficulty etc. Now it's just a single snapshot. I built it in about a week. There is a new bug apparently where the cursor is not changing as expected in chrome.
So that you could process more using your natural biological computer?
But unions can effectively lobby the government, making it extremely difficult for the government to negotiate with public sector unions. Usually the union owns both sides of the negotiating table and gets a blank check. Just look at what happened to Scott Walker, and not even he crossed the police.
Right now, you and I and our friends could sign our transactions so that nobody can tell which outputs correspond to which inputs. What's missing is that it's not widely distributed in a major client where everyone will partake by default.

Until then, it's opt-in, a hassle, with a small pool of anonymity. But "impossible" isn't the word I'd use to describe the scenario.
Which, ironically, requires sitting in front of a screen for hours. ;-)
I love how Yoda makes it into the list.
> The group earned revenues by offering professional website development for paying clients under the name Higher Source.

Wikipedia cites this[0] article which is pretty interesting. There even seems to be what I assume is a mirror of the original site: http://www.religio.de/highersource/server/

[0]: http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=199...
Actually.. There is a way to do it that I was in the process of creating for my personal CSS only game I made 2+ years ago. It involved having a div slide over the content with a specific hover event that would require the user to keep moving their mouse every X seconds or the you lose screen would cover the page.
If defense lawyers formed a cartel, got people loyal to the cartel elected prosecutor, and colluded with the prosecutor, you'd be goddamn right.
It seems from most of her public output that Dines' primary goal is to horrify, more so than to reliably inform.

http://www.charlieglickman.com/2010/07/08/7-ways-to-create-a...

is one example of an article critiquing her work.
Starting, eh?
The author basically says the bitcoin handler at the coffee shop will know how much you have unless you go through a massive scheme (which is probably borderline illegal for decent reasons) to gain back any sense of normalcy.

This is what happens when people take their own ball to go play in their own yard.

If it's going to take the amount of time, energy, and expertise to barely make bitcoin usable, how does the cognitive dissonance not overwhelm the coinbugs?
Does it have public repos?
The problem being that talking about the Bigger Picture gets people mad at you for being preachy, and even leads to holy wars.
This is an interesting question, but could we make this into a real poll?

I'm happy to do this (you need above a certain karma threshold to create polls - I forget what it is) but if the OP would rather not then that's fine too, and I'll leave it.
Who knows. I know that through doing my own projects instead of school, my 'grades' suffered.

I gain far more fulfillment through my own projects than anything else. (And I have to find university CS programs that'll be willing to accept me (along with ones I can afford...)).
That's generally not the case. You might be able to see some of my funds, but certainly not the entire contents of my wallet unless you're using very broken ones. I've hundreds of different inputs in my wallet, and you'd only be seeing one of them.
unbelievable...this is what happens when nerdy zealots are let loose to make crucial product decisions. I am sure there is some hipster hacker in there who advocated the adoption of nosql.
True, but also kind of missing the point.

Basically, what kind of person has such a petty, nasty view of the human species that he honestly believes, if left to our own devices, we'll turn into that?

When you read Brave New World in high school it's a little difficult to recognize there's multiple layers of satire there.
Any service can share its operations with an adversary. That's a risk. If you don't understand that, then you should prefer Digicash to Bitcoin as it's more anonymous, confirms transactions instantly and does not need any stupid mining.

System that flings around my wallet contents does not leave a trace of that activity on the blockchain. Meaning of every transaction is known only to transacting parties, but not to anyone else. That's the big difference from any shared wallet, where operator sees the meaning of all transactions going through it.
These type of "Millennials don't suck" counter-rants would mean more if they weren't only coming from Millennials. People without any or much "real world" life experience don't realize just how valuable and eye-opening that experience is [until of course they have it, and by then they're knocking the next generation].

A common anecdote among rebuttals from Millennials is the whole wearing a suit to an interview. I'm wondering if the people who say "they should judge me for who I am, not what I wear" dress up for a first date? Or when going to a friend's wedding? Dinner at a fancy restaurant? A family member's funeral?

Especially ironic about this counter-rant was the ending: Oh and remember how you said the internet was stupid when it first came out and now you can’t function without email? - does the author really not realize it was Baby Boomers who created the Internet and Web? If he doesn't want Baby Boomers knocking Millennials based on the behavior of some of them then maybe he shouldn't be so quick to assume all Baby Boomers had the same thoughts regarding the Internet.
But we call "Titanium" Titanium - and not Titanum.
There are some people who love business for the sake of business, and to them it doesn't matter what the business they are doing is. I know of some developers with a similar ethic, as long as they are getting paid to code, which is what they see their job as, then they are happy.

Personally, I can't imagine doing it, and I think it is probably rare in the start-up space.

I would have responded with "I'm the type of person who likes to be engaged in the work I'm doing, able to put myself in the shoes of our customers and figure out how to build the best product for them, so for me, the domain is important because if I want to be in work environment where I feel strongly about the product we're creating and customers we're serving."
Absolutely.

I don't use TrueCrypt but I was happy to contribute to the recent fundraiser to audit it. I'd also like to see audits of other (crypto-related) projects such as dm-crypt/LUKS, GnuPG, OpenSSL, GnuTLS, etc (and would happily contribute to those as well!).
Get used to it. This now is a bigger part of the tech world than NodeJS and friends.
Hollywood has a lot of stories like this, for recent example this year saw two movies about the White House being taken over by terrorist, Olympus Has Fallen and White House Down.
Poll: How many hours a day are you looking at a screen?
This is a followup to https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6787687. There seems to be general community interest, so I thought I'd go ahead and create an actual poll.

In an average week how many hours a day are you looking at a screen? Computer/TV/Phone/Tablet/Other
I will take this opportunity, as I take even more tenuous ones, to pimp Mary McCarthy's review of Pale Fire (my favorite book), which is an act of the creative spirit almost as stunning as Nabokov's original:

http://innerlea.com/aulit/paleFire/notes/mccarthy.html
I think your overthinking things here. Who's portraying them as bad things? I think the point isn't that they're bad, it's that they're used by a society to keep itself in a coma.

A society that has killed itself isn't a good thing, but what you read into that is your own perspective. You see happiness as being the problem itself here; but you might also see the means of pursuit as being problematic. Or you might see that happiness may be an insufficient precondition for a healthy society. Or an indictment of mankind in that we're a literally happy to sell our souls for contentment. Or that we don't value the ability to make up our own minds enough.

In short: it's thought provoking, and by all means draw your own conclusions - but even if you think that a happy society is necessarily good and that huxley's full of it, maybe there's still something in another perspective.

For example, it reminds me of how when you optimize for a particular benchmark, you may well succeed while losing sight of the big picture; and you might end up doing more harm than good.
Okay, so the way that imaging data is interpreted is typically quackery, particularly when it is used to diagnose psychopathy
Had to watch ad from Goldman Sachs, prior to the reading.The manipulations of 'Pro-social' psychopaths.
http://www.gitlab.com/cloud/ offers free, unlimited private (and public) repositories and might also be a good place to try it.
yep along those lines...basically the stuff in eclipse, netbeans, visual studio...etc
Bitcoin is not so bad at privacy as you say. But it's certainly can be made better with fully automated solution deployed on massive scale individually, without major agreement or protocol changes. It's just an evolution of the technology. Ajax apps also did not appear overnight on the web.
Desktop, at least 2 hours a day. I feel if I am not at the desktop I am not being productive, but 2+ hours daily productivity is great.

Laptop/tablet/phone/etc. Looking for inspiration, browsing, stuff like that. I would say sometimes more time may be spent here, but it probably is also 2 hours.

TV I try to avoid. I like to watch a few teams and catch some games here and there. Mostly movie time, so another solid 2 hours in this category.

6-8 hours easily, and I always feel like I could double this and still wake up the next morning with a full checklist of things to accomplish.
Hacking Challenge: Hack Tresorit & Get $25,000 Bounty
Technically, userspace already works, as in you can use a standard Darwin/BSD system root and that'll work fine.

For an iOS GUI userspace.. you'd need to implement some more kernel drivers.
That was just added last month, in 6.2: http://blog.gitlab.org/gitlab-ce-6-dot-2-released/
I've had to compare the two. At the current state, Stash is better than GitLab in almost all ways. Better UI, more features and other small things that make a big difference (e.g. repo sync).

GitLab, on the other hand, has two advantages over Stash. Firstly it's open source (+free). Secondly and most importantly, GitLab is under active development and there is a new release with reasonable amount of content every month.

I haven't installed Stash, but for what it's worth GitLab installation and upgrades have been really straightforward.
> ...I chickened out, nodded and smiled...

Nodding and smiling isn't chickening out, and short of keeping a poker face, it's actually the most appropriate reaction.

A job interview (which is what I'm assuming you are referring to) is an opportunity for you to evaluate a prospective employer just as much as it is an opportunity for a prospective employer to evaluate you. Generally-speaking, it should remain free of conflict regardless of what is said. After all, once the interview ends, neither party is under the obligation to continue the process so you have nothing to gain by injecting conflict.

There are a ton of startups out there today. Some are great and have real potential, but a lot of them are run by inexperienced folks with little to no real passion and even less domain expertise. Many of these startups will disappear in the next few years and in a funding environment less frothy, most of them wouldn't exist in the first place.

You are lucky that you were able to speak to the founder and that he was candid enough to reveal things that helped you make a decision. Not every candidate gets this opportunity and unlike you, many candidates don't take enough interest in evaluating the knowledge, experience and perspectives of the people who their employment would be dependent on.
Swiss to vote on linking bosses' pay to wage of office cleaner
Something I wonder about is whether an isp or peer nodes could detect the transactions are coming from you.
If Pilot Pens starting making a auto-signing machine pen, I could see someone getting a tad confused.
Their stance on suicide:

http://www.heavensgate.com/misc/letter.htm
Cypriot university will accept bitcoin (and offers digital currency degree)
I made a distributed, anonymous network for online discussion
It's called Aether: it's a distributed, anonymous and decentralized public space where you can discuss without revealing your identity or being eavesdropped. It has no servers, and it's unblockable.

I wanted to see what HN thought of it—sorry to take your time if out of topic.

Download it here: http://www.getaether.net

A speakerdeck slide introducing Aether:
https://speakerdeck.com/nehbit/aether-a-decentralised-online-public-space

Check out the bitcoin topic! I posted it on reddit earlier today, and there's been some discussion starting up there.

Source code is here: https://github.com/nehbit/aether-public/

What do you think?
Mathematical Definition, Mapping, and Detection of (Anti)Fragility
I was trying out GitLab EE and ran into some install issues on RHEL5 (which were solvable - http://www.digitalsanctuary.com/tech-blog/general/installing... ). However even after a couple days I was unable to get the LDAP integration and LDAP group permissions to work correctly. GitLab support wasn't able to solve it for me, so I tried Stash. 30 minutes later, up and running the way I wanted it.
- 10 hours.
I had never actually thought to ask myself before. I answered 15. Jarring.
I think the danger of the public nature of the blockchain is way overstated. It's fairly trivial to introduce reasonable doubt into your transaction history, blockchain analysis is nowhere near as useful to law enforcement as some people think.

The situation I worry about more is when someone is operating outside of the law, for example if you legitimately but unknowingly end up with some coins that were previously stolen, and then some guys with baseball bats turn up at your house.
Paul Graham is not the author of the piece you mention, it's Olin Shivers.

I was mistaken at first but then I read a fragment which said "and then I went to write scsh" which made it obvious who was the author. I wonder how people can still be mistaken after seeing this (do they assume PG wrote scsh?).
Also from the article: "Conceivably, Maynard said, someone with a clever sieve idea could push this limit as low as 6. But it’s unlikely, he said, that anyone could use these ideas to get all the way down to a prime gap of 2 to prove the twin primes conjecture." So seems like something completely different is needed to actually prove the twin primes conjecture.