skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Let's say I live in an Eastern European kleptocracy. Let's say it's fairly impossible to purchase things legally. What about showing them that I'm actually worth it. If people set up a way to actually donate to the content creators anonymously, we could prove that we aren't actually kleptomaniacs and show what a donation system would actually reap for them. They won't sell it to me legally after all.
See slides #19-#28:

https://www.dartlang.org/slides/2013/06/dart-streams-are-the...

It's Dart instead of JS, but the idea is pretty much the same.
I used to despise the full page ads that would appear before the articles contents were displayed, and would close the page and never come back. Now, I just close the ad and read the article, pretending the ad was never there. Maybe it's just a matter of forced acceptance, because I no longer find it a distraction. However, if you pop something up over the content that I am actively reading, I, like you, am sure to close the page and never come back.
It's a great idea in theory, but a pile of shit in reality. What's the point in using third-party authentication if you get zero data from it? Unlike Facebook, my goal is not to sell user data to the highest bidder, it's to have the user skip the steps where they enter their real name and confirm their email address.
> If you want to implement a non-FB anon login, you basically have to implement a full account management solution yourself, assuming you want the anon account data to be persistent (that is, it's not truly anonymous in the sense that you sign in, do things, sign out, and it's as if you were never there)

That's just not true. Modern web frameworks come with modules that let one have fairly good account management systems without much work.
That's the same outcome as if only one passes, or neither passes.
"this article is so far from the middle ground that you'd need a telescope to see it."

This assumes one is standing on the middle ground. ;)
Seems like a great use-case for that type of worker, and obviously well worth the price. But I'd guess that the vast majority of job seekers are looking for longer-term employment with a single employer. If their target audience includes those types of users, it's difficult to see how it'd be worth the membership price.
If there is a subtle fallacy embedded in the idea that innovation will always save us, there's a blatant fallacy in the idea that we're inevitably doomed because we're absolutely guaranteed to continue on our current course with no changes until we consume all the resources that we are consuming in the current static snapshot of the world. Looking back over the past couple of hundred years of us overcoming challenge after challenge, and drawing the conclusion that it is absolutely certain that can't happen more, is simply an absurd position to take on a rational basis.

If you do not wish to completely flip to the "everything's going to be peachy keen!" side, hey, fine. I'm not even sure anyone's really advocating that. But trying to salvage the panicky pure-ecologist view is in my mind frankly irrational. The one guarantee in life is change, and projecting out the present conditions into the indefinite future as a static precondition is always wrong. Mind you, it may be wrong because the nuclear exchange of 2021 wipes out 98% of humanity and not because the Happy Fun Solar Company solved all world energy problems in 2025, but still, change is inevitable. And what's going forth into the future is not mindless automata who passively experience challenges and fall over dead at a feather's push... what's going forward into the future are several billion human beings, which for all their faults, are still the cleverest things in the Universe we know about.

By the way, trying to mitigate the fact we've overcome challenges by pointing out that there are still challenges in the world is just another way to try to dodge dealing with the fact that we have overcome challenges. I absolutely, positively guarantee you that if we survive another 20 years, that there will be even more challenges. I forsee no day coming where the human race can just sit back and declare total victory over challenges.
>Gold can be used to fill teeth, to conduct electricity and so forth. Bitcoins can do nothing.

If that's why gold has value, then $1290 an ounce seems quite pricey for fillings!
In that situation, you're already fucked beyond all hope, and you cannot win. Typical strategy is to countersue you for infringement of something else. Patents afford exactly zero benefits to a low-resource party in all cases except acquisition (of patent or patent-holder) in which case they become weapons wielded by the bad people again.
Given the competition for hotels in the states... I don't buy that for a minute.
Not necessary; even in countries where you can't get antibiotics without prescription, doctors are prescribing them to avoid liability or to shut up annoying patients. It's a simple question of short-term gain vs. long-term loss.
My guess would be driving around with a relatively short-range jammer actually increases the odds of being hit by a distracted driver. Rather than people driving near you being distracted by conversations on their phones, they're going to be even more distracted because their call just got dropped, prompting them to look at the display waiting for the bars to come back so they can re-dial.
I think it might be the fact that it's a rather large concrete box with very few areas that signal can pass through.
If miners had to be registered and were restricted to a certain amount of hashing power per unique registered user, or had to purchase a standard mining rig (maybe one that doubled as a POS, and restrict mining to merchants) in order to participate, I think that would mitigate the risk of a 51% attack. Right now the imbalance in ability to mine not only creates a risk of an attack, but it skews the distribution of newly generated bitcoin. In my opinion those are the two biggest problems with bitcoin and good enough reasons for it to fail in the long run. It would take a new crypto to address those issues since the initial distribution of bitcoin is so imbalanced.
This makes a "fan-out" model for any feed-type app pretty difficult. For example in an app with friends or followers, when a user posts something the app would perform inserts to add the post into the followers/friends feed tables. It's very bursty, and would be very expensive with this new pricing scheme.
Yahoo will BRB (is having technical issues)
An online journal like in support of the null hypothesis like what you describe can be found here http://www.jasnh.com/ It's published online bi-yearly.
I didn't think another blogging platform was really needed, but their stats and revenue make it sound successful. Congrats, they succeeded where I didn't think it could be done, or would have just hosted WordPress and tweaked it if I was doing it myself.
I have a LinkedIn account, but I've literally never used it for anything. afaik not having it wouldn't have inconvenienced me at any point so far. I'm sure it's pretty far out of date at this point.
The author's view is terribly shortsighted. "I'm going to run out of money next month" versus "I'm going to run out of money next year". Same outcome.

His fallacy, and it's a common one, is thinking that because the problem may be postponed past his own lifetime, that it doesn't matter. What about a hundred years from now? A thousand? Ten thousand?

I for one don't relish leaving my descendants a future in which environmental equilibrium is reached by starving or shooting a few billion surplus people.
Some allergies are known to be caused or exacerbated by repeated exposure, e.g. tomato allergic contact dermatitis becomes common in people who handle or prepare tomatoes for a living.

Although parent's claim is difficult to confirm, it's not impossible.
I agree with everything, but there is that small point that if you don't want to be associated with people you worked with, it does fall into the "shady" category, at least somewhat. I'm sure you have a great reason, and that's why social constructs are much more complicated then whatever LinkedIn's system does and probably will ever do.

And to gf - I'm glad you agree on missing out on people, because some of the best people I know don't have an up-to-date profile, and I'd hate for them to work with people who update their profile too often :)
Oh yeah, it is "the best defense is a good offense" strategy... Wait what? It is ok to use them defensively (that is, pull them out if someone threatens to sue you) But you can't use them for what they are actually intended for? That is for protecting your monopoly for a short period of time?
A patent holder doesn't "use patents for encouraging innovation" The government provides people with patents, to encourage innovation. But if you give me a patent, I don't have to run around using it to encourage others to innovate. What I can do, is make money on the item I already innovated. And maybe I'll have an incentive to innovate some more.
But to call someone a troll for using the patent that way it is intended to be used, because you don't like it, is just plain wrong.
Definitely not. It would be hard to guarantee that jamming stopped at the perimeter of the property. Maybe interference is allowed under exception for industrial cases where there is no real way to prevent it but it is not acceptable for your given use cases.
"Ecologists can't seem to see that when whale oil starts to run out, petroleum is discovered

But not before many types of whale were nearly wiped out, and may yet go extinct.

> or that when farm yields flatten, fertilizer comes along"

The old correlation!=cause problem...
I gave Blake the whole rundown (i.e. laundry list of whines) at GopherCon, and it sounds like a lot of the issues I ran into are fixed in more recent images. I was attempting to inject 1000 containers running a small node.js app into 3 168GB AWS instances via fleet 0.1.3 (I think).

Part of my problem may have been that I was sharing some config data between app instances via Redis, when I could've just used etcd for that.
Not to mention that modern fertilizer is petro-chemical and it is very much limited by the finiteness of those resources.
Really? Let's just hope nothing happens that requires someone to call 911 around you, finding themselves unable to and having emergency services be delayed.
Discoverly Now Has Crunchbase, AngelList Data
Pfizer got out of antibacterial R&D a few years back.

And I have to take issue with your comment "scientific progress can't be bought with money". What do you call all the new drugs that have been produced in the last century? It wasn't done by the government. Yes, basic research funded by the NIH advanced basic science, but it didn't put those pills in a bottle.
No. It is illegal to jam frequencies or spectrums whose use is otherwise governed by the FCC
Where does the base assumption that it has to take over in a decade come from? If you give it a century then its starting to look much less inflationary than holding USD.

You could play a spreadsheet game of finding a length of time to take over such that its always just a little more stable, just a little stronger, than the USD.

Finally another base assumption is that "being a major player" is the only success condition. Would it be an utter failure if instead of becoming as big as the USA economy it never became larger than the Australian economy? Australia isn't all that awful of a place, you know.
My mom's SUV was totaled by a woman who was on her iPad while driving. I really don't think we'll be fixing the idiots-on-the-road epidemic anytime soon.
off topic: What is a good way for someone who is unfamiliar with account management to evaluate modules and select one?

I'd like to setup an account management system and I was planning on doing it manually but figured there had to be a better way.
List of everything that was announced at F8
Why do you need all that? Just curious.

I am the author of http://platform.qbix.com, and it includes decentralized identity. Each app can run on its own machine/cluster, and communicate with other apps. Each app is itself a user in Q.

When a person using a user-agent authenticates with an app, they can either do it natively (providing, say, their email address) or they can select an external app that they already logged into. The user-agent stores the domain of that app, and it's a simple matter of doing oAuth with that app. Except, of course, the user id isn't given out by the user's "home server" but instead a different "xid" (stands of external id) is given to each consumer app.

In short, an app can start life as a consumer of identity and eventually offer to provide identity. The identity provider doesn't just support oAuth, but ideally would allow the user to publish streams that others can subscribe to and view, import contacts and manage access control (privacy) based on those contacts and labels. Finally, they should be able to connect endpoints (such as their mobile phone, email, facebook account etc.) to receive notifications sent to their account by some apps they've authenticated with.

Whenever an app would need to display personal information back to a user, they could do it without ever knowing their personal info: http://www.faqs.org/patents/app/20120110469#b

What do you think?

In the future we might also encrypt this stuff so governments and others can't get it by simply breaking into the database. I don't have any expertise in this last part, so if anyone does I'd be curious to learn.
To add to what sillysaurus3 says, and copying from my comment from an old thread:

As far as I know (IANAL) there is no law or precedent which takes the value of stolen bitcoins into consideration while sentencing. There is also no history (AFAIK) of prosecution, of serious prosecution which takes the effort to follow up on stolen coins may have been "mixed" etc., in cases of BTC theft.

Given this, does not an online service (like Coinbase) which holds a large amount of bitcoin in "stealable" form present, to potential criminals, a lot of incentive to break in and take it all away? I, for one, wouldn't keep up to 5000 USD in such a place, at least till the time there has been some serious prosecution and proportionate sentencing of BTC thieves. But of course to each their own.
Or ask a cartoon physicist on xkcd.

http://xkcd.com/793/
Sam writes: "It just means that for it to succeed, we’ll need significant external buy pressure. As I wrote awhile ago, I think the key thing we need for this is people actually using bitcoin for transactions instead of speculation (and merchants willing to hold bitcoin balances). "

I think this is a very common meme about what success means for bitcoin and it's tied up with a misunderstanding of what money is; most people think money is valuable because it's used transactionally. Rather, money is valuable because it has reservation demand. An increasing level of transactional usage might increase reservation demand but it doesn't need to. On the other hand increasing reservation demand can occur even without any new transactional demand. Moldbug explained this best in his discussions on bitcoin and how money is a bubble phenomenon:

http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2013/04/bitcoin...

http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2011/04/on-mone...

Bitcoin can be "successful" even if it's not the preferred medium of exchange for most, or even many transactions. It can act as a store of value just as gold does. Except it is superior to gold is almost every way - more fungible, more verifiable, more divisible, easier to transport (especially across borders) and easier to transmit. A success case for bitcoin is that it becomes Gold 2.0. Gold's market cap is approximately 7 trillion. Bitcoin's market cap is approximately 6 billion. If Bitcoin were to replace gold as an alternatively medium of savings (say, in 50 years), its price could be hundreds or thousands of times higher than it is now without needed much, if any, increase in transactional use. Gold has almost no transactional use but it has a great deal of reservation demand.
Our antibiotic-creation ability is moot if we don't fix our anitbiotic-resistant-bacteria-creation problem. Both need to be tackled.
The format used on Coursera[1] is pretty nice, in my opinion. It's a combination of slides, video/voice, and drawing/annotation, which seems to work to good effect.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UvMgtcgq34k
I'm not 100% sure. I'm sure some people are working on this problem right now.
Eating a dinner with (lets call it) 8g of protein leaves you to source (lest call it 60/per day) 52g of protein in breakfast and dinner.

Lets say our bunhc of kale is $3, bread $4 other stuff is "free". This leaves us with $7/2=$3.50 food cost. So we get about $1 to split for extra stuff for lunch. We can easily make egg/toast for breakfast, for $.50 cents (egg and a tbsp of jam), and get 5g protein. So now, we need to eat our lunch: 1/3 loaf of bread, 3/4 jar of sardines, and some mustard. Mix in the olive oil and its a reasonable amount of food. But there is only 15g of protein /per 100g in preserved anchovies. So, lunch plus breakfast is ~20g and 1/2 salad is 8g, total of 28... In other words, you are missing your protein intake by 50%. So, the price for eating kale salad while sticking to $4/day--even with generous assumptions--is that the rest of your meals need to make up for it. This is only realistic with a certain level of culinary sophistication. The type of basic re-purposing of ingredients illustrated above is much more likely in reality. And the tradeoffs there are you have to stomach a sandwich that some may condsider an aquited taste (although with 1/2 a lemon and some parsely not so bad) for lunch. But the real issue is scalability ans sustainability: over time missing 30g protein a day...is no problem for one day...but it is a problem as a lifestyle.

If you have the skills/education and priveledges needed to access cost-effective fresh ingredients, whilst maintaining an active pantry...and/or you are the type of person to do spreadsheets of food cost...life isn't so hard...but one is assuming away many of the difficulties that face the $4/day folks on food-stamps, IMHO.
I agree. Although the article content is good and reaches a good, nuanced
conclusion, the title is going to confuse people. Many people will only
ever encounter XTS when setting up full disk encryption with dm-crypt,
where they'll be presented with the choice between XTS and CBC-ESSIV.
This is already a confusing choice with no good context to help a user
make a decision. Remembering this headline, I bet some people are going
to pick CBC-ESSIV over XTS, which is wrong.

The title is also somewhat link-baity, since I clicked expecting bombshell
revelations about XTS. I suggest the mods to change it to "You don't
want XTS (except for full disk encryption)."
Ugh, I hate the "balanced" argument for "middle ground".

If one person says 2 + 2 = 4 and another says 2 + 2 = 6, the truth is NOT that 2 + 2 = 5.
I have couple of ideas for the domain name www.logodzine.com that I own. I am looking for a co-founder/business partner help startup.
Not working for people who chose a specific brand of operating system cannot be reasonably called 'screwing over' those people, whichever that OS is, especially if those people won't pay for the work.
So in short: The free market will save us.
The TL;DR:

* Callbacks passed to cb-based libraries may be called twice - promises are only resolved once, either fulfilled or rejected.

* Callback-based libraries may blow up if the callback throws - promise libraries shield the callback stack from "blowing up" (but do require slightly less careless management of resources at the call-stack site)

* Callbacks passed to cb-based libraries may be called before the current even tick completes, potentially creating the zalgo problem - callbacks attached to promises are always called after the currently executed function finishes.
Lol when bitcoin was at $100 and crashed to as low as $3 at one point I thought that was the end of it. It's proved surprisingly resilient though. I think bitcoin only gains value when it reaches new consumers/markets, and loses value when the hype dies down. After it runs of out of hype it's long term value depends on it's effectiveness as a currency which is dubious(certainly not convincing at this point).
On a related note, anyone know why cinemas don't have some form of shielding/Faraday caging to prevent people from making calls? You could shield just the movie halls themselves, so people can still make emergency calls from the lobbies.
If the user uses Facebook login they're already showing they trust Facebook. This just means they don't have to also trust every app developer. Also Facebook obviously can't see what your service stores against that anonymous (to you) user, so there's no real data leakage here. Your solution only works if you don't need a login at all - if you do is anybody else offering anything like this? As a user it sounds great.
Test Induced Design Damage?
It also ignores massive collapses of civilizations throughout history because of ecological collapse. In the past they were localized, but we are becoming more connected with each other.
At no point was it declared there were no tests. So... different topic?

Seriously, straw men not withstanding, this thread is specifically about tested code where a complaint was raised about how long the tests take. And the "how long" was only 4 friggin minutes for a full suite, or 4 seconds for a module.
It also differs dramatically between regions, since the local governments may have varying amounts of data publicly available.

For example, many cities in OSM have virtually perfect address geocoding because some random person pestered their local government to openly release a dump of addresses and their coordinates, whereas Google is just guessing at house numbers.
> Remember, it is MORE EXPENSIVE in the long run to buy that cheap meat. When you have a routine infection that can't be cured with antibiotics

This is a common misconception. You can't get antibiotic resistance from eating meat that was treated with antibiotics.

The resistance occurs at the farm, and is washed into sewage etc. It does not occur in your body (from eating meat).

Avoiding meat raised with antibiotics might (slightly) help slow resistance, but it won't have any direct effect on you.

Remember it's the bacteria that become resistant not the person.
Since the article doesn't really endorse XTS in any context, I'm not sure your proposed title is accurate.

I didn't write the article for the front page of HN. I wrote it so that the next time someone says "we're going to switch from CBC to something more advanced like XTS", I can point them at the article instead of writing a long comment.
Emphasizing the above, the study a few years ago of disk drives at big HPC centers found that they don't follow a bathtub failure model. Rather, there are very few infant failures, and wear is noticeable starting in the range of 1-2 years in service.
The only benefit of anonymous facebook login over a native session is the supposed "cost" of creating too many accounts, and enabling things like a http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sybil_attack

Actually I would like to ask if anyone here knows of more good solutions for making creating accounts expensive. Captchas ain't it anymore.

The best one I know is Phone Verification. http://www.blackhatworld.com/blackhat-seo/making-money/59699...

Buying a cellphone in order to get an account is expensive enough. But is there something better?
That's probably why you were at Yahoo and not Google/FB
This.
Facebook is a glorified user registration system on mobile. As a developer, I have no incentive to use FB anonymous login.
In England (and probably many other countries)

Passive (blocking signals using faraday cages) is fine.

Active (blocking signals by sending other signals) is very much not fine and will attract legal attention.

England is currently changing (or at least thinking of changing) the law to allow prisons to use cell-phone jammers. They can't do it at present.