skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
>I don't see what a built in formatter does, other than allow to minimize bikeshedding about format

That's exactly what it does -- and it's an absolute wonderful experience to see it in Go. I'd say it again: very few people don't like, and most that tried Go were singes the praises of this idea.
The author makes some good points, but if he wants to make this comparison, he needs to do so when Facebook shares and Bitcoin are trading at volumes the US Dollar trades at.

Most mainstream economists can't get past the idea of a currency or unit of value that isn't backed by a central authority to guarantee it's value. I would argue that a currency backed by a central authority may be more stable in the short-term, but in the long-term it is much riskier.

This is because you are exposing yourself to the risk of the backing authority (e.g., the government) being incompetent or mismanaging the currency. Take the Euro for example. This is why countries experience things such as hyper-inflation and default on their debt. The issue is when a government is managing (read: controlling) the value of the currency, the market cannot correct itself when things go bad.

If I had money to put into Bitcoin today, I would do so based on the news of Mt. Gox yesterday. Bitcoin will recover because there are more actors than just a central government putting their faith and support behind this currency. Facebook, on the other hand, is a stock which one day needs to justify its value based on how much money it earns. At it's P/E ratio today, I am not so sure it can do that.
What does having a fiscal policy have to do with anything related to this issue?
Google Wave was confusing and served a tangential purpose.
It's probably easier to get it in when you're solving a real problem.
Right, but with the blockchain being public, there's a certain parallel between stolen BTC and stolen art.
Perhaps it's called Spritz because the user is meant to keep a spray bottle full of water on hand, spritzing occasionally, so as to obviate the need for blinking :)
WhatsApp Plans To Add Voice Calls In Q2 This Year
The Harold Wilson argument: the numeraire of your wallet is indeed unchanged. The value of what you can buy with it has fluctuated dramatically.
McCaleb has said that MtGox was at least at some point used for trading or buying cards.
Dogecoin has a fixed rate of growth of the money supply - inflation is the ratio of growth of the money supply to growth of the economy. So a shrinking money supply can be deflationary, but so can a growing one whose usage is growing faster. DOGE, right now, is probably deflationary.
Email in the current form has declining value today, but there's plenty of potential for innovation in email. Those claiming it to be irrelevant are simply twisting & sensationalizing the above fact.
If you're looking for infotainment, there are plenty of other rare diseases and disabilities that also deserve coverage. Example that comes to mind:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nodding_disease
That's a good point, but not the whole story(at least for me).

I love my Kindle. I am very adverse to buying books on it, even though I would sometimes go hungry to buy physical books. It makes no sense, I know and acknowledge that it makes no sense, yet it is still part of my decision making process, and post-event evaluation process. Meaning - those books on my bookshelf that I may never read - no regret, they may come in handy. That ebook I bought and actually used - I still have nagging "did I blow $9.99 on that - I could have gotten by with googling and reading the docs".
Next time we need a bigger room. The hallway that led to the Go room was filled 1.5 hours before the Vitess talk. The Go devroom was really popular.
How to Interview a Data Scientist
I stand corrected, you weren't being pedantic at all. I guess all those people lined up outside the bank, ready to riot, were waiting for the government to give them their money back.
No, but Madoff went to jail, Corzine narrowly avoided it, and MF Global is out of business. Governments can't prevent crime, but they do punish it.

The distinction here isn't inflation vs deflation, but flexible policy set by current leaders according to circumstances vs rigid policy set by past leaders according to ideology.
Right now it's an easy win. There's a lot of people still using it and it fits nicely into our current user base. But we totally agree!
Tesla to reveal details of battery 'Gigafactory'
Mt Gox CEO Karpeles says bitcoin exchange is at turning point
don't forget poverty in the 1920s is way different than poverty in 2014.

getting the basic needs like shelter, food, water, heat are a lot easier to come by these days (many government services). And many of the poor have TVs (cable even), cell phones, cars, etc.

my point isn't that being poor is no big deal... my point is the rich AND poor both have it better off than they a hundred years ago.

As I (vaguely) recall, PG made a similar point in Hackers and Painters.
It has nothing to do with profit, it has to do with the fact that OP is calling the failing of a specific business a crisis to a currency.

Did he say there was an "insult to the dollar currency" when Lehman Brothers went under?
A successful digital currency has to be attractive to people who are free to choose among a variety of digital currencies. That implies it must have properties that are like gold, or perhaps even more compelling in the same ways. Or you have to find a different set of compelling properties.

I don't think you can get around the fact that free people have a set of motives that is at cross purposes with governments. If you degrade the ability of governments to seize or control the transfer property and information, the Leviathan starts to look like a 20th c. museum piece. Hobbesianism is at least as dogmatic, rigid, and brittle as big-L Libertarianism.
Isn't the app-craze just a sign that websites are too complicated, slow, in many cases also somewhat shady and full of annoying ads? Most of them are nearly impossible to navigate using a mobile browser and extremely annoying. App stores give us a tiny bit more security (through moderation) and UIs that will work for our device.

Making websites that work well both on desktop and mobile browsers is a PITA. We already have too many browser versions (and deficiencies) to take care of (yes, we really do not want 2-3% fewer users = customers = revenue), mobile browsers add a whole bunch of new issues to take care of (hover, selections etc. all work differently).

As long as we don't have a framework or set of widgets that works properly everywhere and is fast/small enough for mobile devices, Apps will have a Raison d'être. Now go write one or stop complaining!
Sure, and then the next step is consumer protection laws that negate some of the common tricks to try and restore balance, and so the game goes on.

However, few if any of these protections typically apply to someone who is using a service for free, such as people with Facebook accounts. As soon as real money is changing hands, it becomes much harder for the recipient of that money to get away with not keeping up their side of the bargain.
We'd prefer in office but we'd consider remote work. Shoot as an email at geekhr@getbellhops.com and we'll see if we can work something out.
Hopefully one of the lessons people learn is, "If it looks too good to be true, it is." I had to learn this lesson through a very painful and costly process, and while I would not wish such learning on anyone, I feel it is a very important lesson to have learned.
0.

I used to mine bitcoins and have them sent to MtGox (in tiny fractions of course) but stopped doing it long before as this process became too inefficient.
people who've been around bitcointalk and bitcoin-otc know not to use MtGox

There are a lot of forums on the Internet. It's not confidence-building, at all, to tell people "if you hang out on the right forum you know what's safe." Especially because "the right forum" is not written in stone.
PLOS’ New Data Policy: Public Access to Data Immediately
It's too bad that they're going under and taking everyone's money with them, but the sooner they go away the better. Nobody will trust them again regardless of what they do. The more they're in the press the worse bitcoin looks.
You're right: nbytes is optional. That means it is even less likely that a call to recvfrom_into will be exploitable. That's because the default maximum receive size is taken as the size of the buffer if nbytes is zero/unset. See the comment in the existing code right above the patch:

/* If nbytes was not specified, use the buffer's length */

So it still seems to me that in order to be exploitable an application would need to specify a "wrong" value for nbytes, which after the patch would raise an exception. It's not a case where such code should work and instead overflows.
This.

I was quite disappointed by http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2013/12/why-i-wa...

You don't like bitcoin and wish it would go away. Ok, fair enough. ...but that's not a conversation. That's the end of a conversation.

Of all people I would have expected Stross (who've I've met in person and found to be quite awesome) would take the 'here's how it could be better, lets talk about it' stance, rather than 'this thing is bad and should just go away forever'.

You know, fair enough. You have a firm opinion and you're sticking to it. I respect that; but it's a boring conversation when you're not even willing to listen to the other side and talk about it.
> I mean, it might be prejudice, but "Ives, Rockefeller and Berstein" as a financial service just feels more secure than "$uper7eetMoneyMakah", "LuvFlamingoes" or "MagicalTux".

How do you feel about "Bear Stearns" or "Lehman Brothers"?
I get your point but I do empathize with the OP in the msoft bigotry here gets really old. Those of us that use it feel ostracized and bucketted to second class citizen status. For those lost in the .net world, I'll say the feeling is mutual on the other side of the fence.

I suspect part of the grind is that code changes for microsoft requires a litany of testing and release planning and such. Being beholden to a paying userbase ties ones hands in numerous ways (god forbid their patch breaks something else). That said, there is no excuse for sloppy communication.
Clarification: MTGOX was intended to stand for that, but the card exchange was never finished, probably for lack of interest.
People in 1989 didn't exhibit a nearly religious devotion to ARPANET as perfect in every way, going so far as to say things like "Bitcoin cannot fail, it can only be failed" (do people realize how absurd this sounds?)

When every one of Bitcoin's characteristics (deflationary money supply, irreversibility of transactions, completely public record) is touted as an unmitigated advantage, it is irritating to those of us who see it as an interesting idea and cool technology with both plusses and minuses.

ARPANET isn't superior to post offices in every way; for example you can't send a package through ARPANET. And in fact one of the Internet's biggest winners Amazon.com built its success largely on being really good at shipping.
Why only apps licensed under a GPL compatible license? What about all the GPL incompatible free/open source licenses?
Doesn't Charlie understand that real people got hurt here? I find it incredibly insensitive to post something like that.

Yes people should not have kept their stuff on Gox. People have been warning from Gox since 2011 (where has Charlie been there? Nowhere, ahyes, hindsight 20/20 and all that?).

But it happened, and now there's lots of angry and hurt people. Maybe not add insult to injury mkay?
The only way to read faster is to comprehend faster.None of these words flashing programs will work unless you learn toRead with the conceptual right brain.In essence, comprehension must come first.Otherwise it's like learning to use the gas pedal before you learn to use the steering wheel.
Proof of stake means: your chance of mining coins is derived from how big a Scrooge McDuck style money pool you already have. Merely for owning that money, Mr McDuck gets more money.
The only way to read faster is to comprehend faster.None of these words flashing programs will work unless you learn toRead with the conceptual right brain.In essence, comprehension must come first.Otherwise it's like learning to use the gas pedal before you learn to use the steering wheel. Take a look at www.readspeeder.com To see what I mean.
Python.org redesigned
US Government Open Data Initiative
> The man wrote the first book I read where distributed autonomous corporations transacted on their own behalf. The idea of python based corporations and legal denial of service attacks blew my mind.

Charles Stross should love the idea of Ethereum, then:

http://www.ethereum.org/

http://bitcoinmagazine.com/9671/ethereum-next-generation-cry...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9dpjN3Mwps
I don't understand what you mean by cache poisoning. If a resolver was queried for a single record type, that doesn't mean that's the only record that resolver will return... That would break all kinds of things. Usually DNS servers return referrals to other record types if they don't find the one they're looking for, but in your example the correct record type always exists, so it should always be returned and cached properly. The mail server may decide to error out if it finds a CNAME where it expected only A and MX records.

edit Oh, I see, this is a DNS spec issue, not an MTA or resolver issue. According to DNS specification clarification RFC2128, if a CNAME exists, no other record should exist with that name - so in theory a DNS server or resolver could simply drop all other records if it found a CNAME. (That seems like very bad behavior, though!)

10.1. CNAME resource records

The DNS CNAME ("canonical name") record exists to provide the
canonical name associated with an alias name. There may be only one
such canonical name for any one alias. That name should generally be
a name that exists elsewhere in the DNS, though there are some rare
applications for aliases with the accompanying canonical name
undefined in the DNS. An alias name (label of a CNAME record) may,
if DNSSEC is in use, have SIG, NXT, and KEY RRs, but may have no
other data. That is, for any label in the DNS (any domain name)
exactly one of the following is true:

+ one CNAME record exists, optionally accompanied by SIG, NXT, and
KEY RRs,
+ one or more records exist, none being CNAME records,
+ the name exists, but has no associated RRs of any type,
+ the name does not exist at all.
5 Things That Don't Have to Be Hard in Single Page Applications
I'd be interested to know quite how they're solving the "canonical names for everything" problem [0]. They're presumably making their own ontology, rather than using someone else's.

Also, best attribute name ever [1]: "BoundStateWaveFunctionMomentumRepresentationAbsoluteValueSquared"

[0]: http://reference.wolfram.com/language/ref/CanonicalName.html
[1]: http://reference.wolfram.com/language/ref/PhysicalSystemData...
The USD, a currency (which Bitcoin is apparently), was left relatively unaffected.
On the other thread there was some information suggesting this might be an internal account used by another exchange.
On the other hand, there is a much greater incentive to improve regulations (eg, to separate retail banking activities) than to trust incompetents with your money, especially when you consider that the central actor also provides essential infrastructures such as an education system, roads, public safety and social welfare. You don't want the clowns running Mt Gox to design the next plane you're going to take.
You can't smell a Bitcoin or admire its beauty. You're missing the point.

That's a separate set of characteristics from talking about Bitcoin as an investment.

Tulips, when the price crashed, were still pretty flowers.

Bitcoins, if the price goes to $0.01/BTC, still have those characteristics you described.
ManyShip Wants to be the AirBnB for Posts and Parcels
Just as interest in the conventional economic system is wildly anti-egalitarian: very literally, the rich get richer.
There's really one spot where it matters: I think that when we fail to distinguish adequately between idiocy and malice, we begin to fall into the trap of seeing all catastrophes like this as malicious in hindsight, and consequently lull ourselves into assuming that any future catastrophes must also stem from malice.

The end result being, we hinge huge decisions on the question, "Do I think this person might actually try to hurt me?" without giving adequate attention to the question, "Does this person possess sufficient competence to reliably avoid hurting me by accident?"

Not just in finance. The issue seems to come up in health care quite a bit, too. Do you really want someone who doesn't fully grasp the germ theory of disease sticking sharp objects into you after previously having stuck them into someone else? The occasional outbreaks of hepatitis associated with acupuncture suggest this is a question we might want to spend more time thinking about. Instead, we tend to not get past worries (including legitimate ones) about whether or not Big [insert_big_thing_here] is trying to hurt us.
You are right, "molasses" is in (11,1) and not in (10,1). I just fixed my original comment, and marked the editions.
BTC ecosystem won't come crashing down because BTC has real-world utility.

As for MtGox users who lost money, I would think this counts as a capital loss that can be written off on their taxes. It can be used to offset capital gains or to reduce their AGI by $3,000 per year with carryover of losses into future years. It will be interesting to see the stance that the IRS takes of people who bought BTC for $1,000 each and then it turned worthless due to Mt Gox. The money is either gone due to capital loss (in which case it's deductible) or theft (in which case it's deductible, but better get a police report).

More discussion from a few months ago:

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB1000142405270230477310...
The problem here is that regressive eye movements are an inherent part of reading. The text in their example doesn't necessitate any saccades, but arbitrary text will!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eye_movements_in_reading

Eye Movements in Reading, Rayner (1983):
http://books.google.com.au/books?id=Lx51Brw60cMC&pg=PA79&lpg...
Adds to the sharing economy. But a whole lot of questions on safety.
That is why I said "assuming no overlap". The number I wanted to estimate is the number of bitcoins (currently) not in use or in illegitimate possession; the number of bitcoins that would not hurt anybody or hurt the right people if one would abandon the current block chain. Satoshi not caring to lose one million bitcoins is of course a wild guess. And don't take the whole thing to serious because it makes a lot of not necessarily justifiable assumptions, for example that the thieves did not already cash out their booty.
I've never been able to get the hang of speed reading (I think I lack the knack for skimming), but I listen to a lot of audiobooks, and have a similar procedure for dense sections. Even when I'm distracted and prone to zoning out, I always get essentially 100% comprehension because I just rewind back to the last part that I remember well. In fact, it seems I still pick up something when I'm zoned out, because I'll remember little aspects of the section on the re-read. So just blasting through does seem to lower the cognitive load of a re-read, even if your comprehension the first time around is very low or seemingly non-existent.
I think the core of the analogy is not in the security itself, but in the user experience.

Unless you trust a third party, carrying a Bitcoin wallet with you becomes a hassle -- you have to set up software to pay from a given PC, and if you move between a lot of devices, you have to assume even your private keys for your wallet may be compromised.

I think at least when it comes to the experience, people would like to have BTC operations as seamless as sending money via their internetbanking or paying with a debit card.

BTC then becomes less useful if you still need a large entity to trust so you have a pleasant experience sending and receiving money. (Useful still, but less so.)
Well, he wouldn't have gotten more than any other early adopter. And nobody accuses them of being scammers - just taking a heck of a gamble and it paying off.

Edit: Apologies, I did more research after posting this comment. Apparently Satoshi did mine quite a lot in the early days, but the addresses he used are well-known (one of the advantages of a public ledger - go to blockchain.info and look at any block with an index less than 20,000), and if anyone tried to spend them, it would be in the news.
Do you lose the karma points that you gained from that answer?
> A nightmare is just a flavor of dream--it is still a dream.

You must be overjoyed with the way things are going. A bit more push and we'll reach an Orwellian "dream".
How To Learn Trigonometry Intuitively
+1 for Android app soon!
It is an improvement compared to HTTP/1.1, in that it allows for opportunistic encryption, and it is those connections that can be cached (or if you so prefer, snooped). This will still make it harder for NSA and similar agencies to do mass surveillance without traces. They would either have to insert their own certificate, or get the private key from the ISP. That is far more difficult to do in a covert manner. This alone makes HTTP/2.0 an improvement.
You can't have progress without the possibility of failure. I'm glad my local bank is regulated and insured by the government, but I'm also glad that the world of Bitcoin exists for people who want to experiment with digital currencies.
The part of "running a SSH server that you wrote in PHP in production" that is scary is not the "in PHP" part.

It's the "that you wrote" part.

No matter what language you write it in, you are going to mess something up. The OpenSSH guys have messed up working a lot smarter and more diligently and with more time than you have.
This is one reason why MS had significant developer mindshare ten years ago: they invested a ton of resources into creating great developer tools, be they IDEs, languages, or frameworks. While many have derided MS for their frantic pace with this, it does convey an attitude of "developers are important to us: have some new toys." While those tools weren't always the most advanced, they did build on each other.

The web today is still dominated by the same tech stack I learned in HS: HTML/CSS/JS. The DHTML of yesteryear has mainly had hordes of libraries built on it to make it more palatable. But accidental growth tends to spawn a lot of needless complexity. The web is a fantastic delivery mechanism, and I love that it's open. But it's just so painful for app development compared to the walled gardens that I don't blame developers for sticking with something that is more cohesive.
Is Microsoft on a mission from NSA to buy all European companies, or something? Skype, Nokia, Dailymotion...
Bugged recordings of prominent Turks are appearing almost every day
That sadly was the case for a lot of the smaller rooms :(. Lots of interesting topics.
I want Bitcoin to fail, because to me it's a scam designed to enrich the few who got in early. I understand that this is an important problem, but this is just a very long con.

I also will enjoy it when the investors who funded duds like Lucas Duplan (Clinkle) lose their entire investment and some degree of reputation.

I'm a regular reader of Valleywag and whenever some poser gets humiliated, I'm glad to see it.

You know what this is not? It's not schadenfreude and I wish people wouldn't use that word.

I don't want these people (HN libertarians, top VCs, Silicon Valley scenesters and idiots) to suffer. I just don't care if they suffer. And, so it is that most of the best things for society right now hurt the people at the top of that world.