skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> When you know that there’s, what, 13 million coins in circulation, and more than 50% of the them are owned and managed by about 950 people, you realize how shallow the market it is and how subject the market is to manipulation.

Is it wrong to apply this to say, Microsoft stock? For the sake of the argument let's say Bill Gates owns 50%, and a handful of other employees 20%. Does that intrinsically make it a shallow market, subject to manipulation?

And what sort of manipulation is he talking about exactly?

> There’s no evidence that people who spend down their wallets buy back in.

There is evidence, people do this all the time. I'm not sure if he literally means no evidence, or that he's suggesting it's an insignificant minority.

> When you heard the hype coming from the community, and … that people were spending money on this stuff, they needed to know the truth.

I really just don't think this is as objective as he thinks it is... there isn't a 'truth' that desperately needs exposing here. It's more complicated than that and we're still yet to see how it develops.

He does raise some good points though, and I find it interesting he says Bitcoin isn't very good for money laundering.

I can also see why someone would think it's a pump and dump - it does appear to share many characteristics from an outside view. People pump it sure, but the vast majority of 'pumping' I observe is sincere, backed by a strong belief and excitement in Bitcoin. Not to realise quick profits. Also now with a total dollar value of billions, it's not really in the traditional value range for 'pump and dumps', schemes that tend to rely on much lower value and easily manipulable assets.

I do think telling the average Joe on the street right now to probably stay away from Bitcoin is becoming an increasingly savvy advice. There's a lot of scams and bad ideas out there.
This doesn't really add up, except on small planes most of the passengers have no proximity or access to windows at all and the few with windows can be overruled at any time by a steward.
The reason I pity people who are passionate about power or money is because I have experienced much greater happiness in loving and being loved, unconditionally. The strongest of those loves are from my wife, my kids, my sisters and my mom and dad. None of those folks love me because of power or money.

I've had a couple things that would demonstrate me having money like a super expensive watch, a brand new Audi, a big house, etc. They were great for getting fleeting "Wow, he's got money!" glances from folks. Then I realized their like for me was related to stuff, not me. It just all seemed very vacuous.
One if the major things .NET had in it's favor was MSR to actually figure out generics. MS Corp viewed it as an academic and experimental feature and would never have gotten it implemented on their own. From what I've heard, Delphi's mastermind was not in favor of them, but I don't have a quote for that. Furthermore, looking at C#'s first couple releases, it seems they were aiming for a slightly improved Java. Only after F# did C# reluctantly start to pick up functional features.

To MS's credit, .NET did aim to be a true multi language runtime, back to Project 7. They got feedback from many people to make sure many languages could be accommodated (looks like they've since given up on this goal). Ironically, the JVM, with it's strictly less capable VM, boasts far more languages targeting it's runtime. Probably because Microsoft worked against releasing it for other platforms and is still a bit standoffish.
I think that was either a huge compliment, or a terrible slight, but I can't quite figure out which one :)
You just made a perfect argument for using Uber/Lyft. As far as I understand it. Neither of them requires their drivers to go into thousands of dollars of debt to become part of the system.
At 48:55 ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_Sr96TFQQE#t=2933 ) Snowden says you cannot control who uses the backdoors.

I assume he is referring to malicious bugs and simple/sloppy backdoors?
For example, if I append my public ssh key to someones .ssh/authorized_keys, it's not a backdoor anyone else could use.
You don't need a runtime environment on the client side to design a cross platform development toolkit. What happens with iOS is that 3rd party tools compile native iOS packages (kind of like cross compiling to target a platform different from the one you're developing in)
Before PayPal, Musk was heavily involved in Zip2. Upon its sale, he netted $22M. So that suggests an answer to your question: If he hadn't netted $160M from PayPal, he would've founded another company where he could go bigger.

Zip2 details on Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elon_Musk
This is true, but I think it's important to remember that you really do need both hard work and luck. The insidious American myth is that hard work is the one and only ingredient to success. The implication, of course, is that anyone who doesn't succeed must be lazy or otherwise undeserving, no matter how diligently they actually worked.
Book Search Results For: T.J. Phull
>But Uber ought to be working to change the law, not breaking it in the hopes that the government eventually just gives up.

Abiding by the law is not how any significant social movement has worked - ever.
But this is not a new news! I've been hearing about such 'concept' ideas by aircraft manufacturers for months, if not for years now.

What I take issue with is the wording of the sub-heading of this story, "UK developer working on replacing heavy aircraft windows with uber-light smartscreen panels to cut fuel consumption and slash air fares".

How is the inception of this idea related to some artist/developer sitting in UK? With all due credit to the UK peoples for contribution to the field of engineering, this sub-heading is a mis-representation of facts and it seems like theguardian is simply trying to push some sort of agenda to the rest of the world.
How will your service be funded?

Without wanting to put you off, most people will say that its a good idea if the service is free. It's a different story if they have to pay for it.

Are the professors your target market? If not, find your target market and validate with them.

Its so important that you validate the idea before spending all your time, energy and money on it.

Good luck with this, sounds like you're passionate which is a great start.
The CLR is more flexible than the JVM, but if you're only using C# you'll usually only notice when doing C interop. With the major exception of structs and generics, which may provide large speed improvements.

C# the language is superior in essentially every way to Java. Far less code = less bugs. F# takes it up another notch, while allowing you to keep interop.

Microsoft has had plenty of opportunity to officially support Mono, but they have not. Their patent promise only extends to Mono as long as you don't run into other issues with Microsoft. If MS wanted, they could, at any time, start really supporting Mono and work to unify runtimes. But anything's possible.
I would if I had an Ubuntu Edge

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ubuntu_Edge
Kevin thanks so much that's so nice of you. You seem like a genuine person. Mattermark though seems like a tool for investors though. Maybe I am wrong.
Branching on this, why not an app to enable a Tor server only when wifi is available? And for those scared to allow it on their own network, allow the user to disable it on a certain SSID or somethin.
This idea that the "blockchain" can be divorced from a currency that has value ignores a simple fact: if you don't reward miners with something that has value, few people will mine and the blockchain won't be secure anymore.

(And a mature version of proof-of-stake would have similar issues. There has to be something at stake.)
I used an old Android phone for my garage door server: https://plus.google.com/+BobLee/posts/7LyfdV3PC5X

It runs the Jetty web server. When I was the core library lead for the Android platform ('06-'09), we ran Jetty's test suite as part of Android's acceptance tests, so it works great!

Why don't people use phones as servers more often? They're overkill when you can get a Raspberry Pi for ~$50. You typically don't need an LCD, touch screen, accelerometer, cell radio, etc. for a home server.

Also, Android runs a heavily stripped down version of Linux, so running off-the-shelf server software can be tricky.
This is a pretty terrible bug if this post is accurate.

EDIT: I just tried it out and duplicated Dan's results. It's pretty bad, because it means you never want to use Mail Drop to send files to people unless you KNOW that they use a mail client that will show the message (e.g. a recent version of Apple Mail or MS Outlook).

From an engineering standpoint, it seems clear that the current Mail Drop behavior is Doing It Wrong.

The right thing would be to render the plain text of the message, along with the download URL, in the plain text message part.
I think he's speaking more broadly about (government) backdoors baked into devices at the factory level, on a widespread scale.
* Storage space/attachment is an issue

* Local lan speed sucks - some phones still only have 2.4Ghz 802.11n

* Cost is an issue - If I have a spare phone sitting around I'd probably be better off selling it and buying a small ARM board with ethernet that I can run Linux on and a USB drive.
Fair point - revenue is just a way to speak about size. Amongst my CEO friends, yearly revenue is used as the blunt measurement of the size of business.

I would say there's some validity to the fact that each step can build on the previous. I almost laugh when I think about how little I knew back in 2004 about the mechanics, tactics and financing of startups. However, that knowledge wasn't the limiting factor. It was the idea.
> Taxi regulation is corrupt and broken.

Maybe, but I think taxi regulation is harder than it seems at first blush. My experience with Uber, in D.C., has been abysmal. The drivers just don't know what they're doing or where they're going. I'll punch in my location, the app will tell me a driver will pick me up in 4 minutes, and 15 minutes later after circling the block, I might be on my way. Yeah yeah, reputation economy or whatever, but it doesn't actually work. The Uber driver I get is whichever one accepts my hail. When the ETA immediately jumps 5 minutes longer after my hail is accepted, from what the app estimated, what am I supposed to do, cancel and find a better one and waste more time? After all, if I weren't in a hurry, I wouldn't be calling a cab!

The existing regulatory infrastructure isn't perfect, but I'm very skeptical of the ability of technology to ensure quality and safety in the taxi industry. The technology doesn't offer a good replacement for an old fashioned line of sight hail, and those drivers although rude at least know where the hell they're going.
The unspoken premise here is that the only important thing about loyalty is how much it costs you compared to always using the least expensive service.

I'd like to point out that many people (myself included) complain about phenomena like the race to the bottom in mobile app prices and the death of customer service in our airlines... but then we (myself often included) make measurements like this, with loyalty rarely considered and, when it is, often derided as simply a source of extra overhead.

This post is a great example: The author happily compares these companies solely on cost, with no reference at all to quality in any way, shape, or form.

There are more dimensions to goods and services than how much you pay for them, but we too often make that not only the primary metric (by a long shot) but sometimes the only metric, and that misses all sorts of points.

Don't expect quality services to start and stay when your primary view of "loyalty" is its "cost."
Honestly, even if you consider it wasteful (and there's a strong argument to contest this) it's currently pretty low on the things to lose sleep over. There's a lot more low hanging fruit in wasted resources in this world that we should be looking at first. In my opinion Bitcoin comes under too much unfair scrutiny in this regard.
"It will help you to survive" is a far cry from, "The evidence vastly supports wheat being awesome for your health," though. Based on that logic, all food is "awesome for your health." :P
Interesting contrast to PG's earlier convention of "the idea doesn't matter as much as the founders because the idea can/will change".
YouTube was especially amazing in its speed. It went from zero to a $1.6B acquisition is just a year and a half.
Just wait until you're sitting on a ten hour flight next to one of those screens. How many hours of advertising do you reckon it'll broadcast to you?
This does vary according to location (as the article says), but I've used cabs, Uber and Lyft in SF. I prefer Uber and Lyft by far over the standard cab services. The cars and drivers are generally nicer. I don't really have a preference for Uber vs Lyft and tend to go with the cheaper/more convenient option in the moment. However, I do find that Lyft drivers are generally more social while Uber drivers will let you keep to yourself more easily, so I also book based on mood sometimes.
That may depend on what you're using it for. But how often do you have to memorize different chords like that?
Most of his competitors destroyed themselves. See "In Search Of Stupidity" by Chapman.
OOP... where originally specified as a queued serializable messaging-based topology of reusable components, i.e. what we now know as a actor/agent based programming.

... But where CPU stack-based function calls (cutely named "method calls") was what was actually delivered. Presumably because in the 80's, what was specified, was too costly on the CPU and memory to deliver. Oops, indeed.

A lot of bad decisions were made in the 80s in the name of CPU and memory. Just look at RDBMS still in the 21st century being the default persistence layer for 99% of applications.

OOP is a pattern that became popular for GUI programming because everything is inherently messaging-based already, and because Xerox and Apple adopted it and for some reason people thought it could be reasonably applied across all types of programming.
So, because people can "always get another job", you think it's right that Microsoft under Bill Gates (unethically) crushed the companies that they put their time, money and effort into? Man you must be drinking some crazy corporate kool aid
User friendliness and simplicity are completely orthogonal. For instance, Microsoft Word is very user friendly, yet it is an immensely complex piece of software.

I value simplicity over user friendliness.

Despite git having several usability blemishes, it is insanely simple. The only simpler system that I have ever used is quilt (used to manage patch files). When mercurial advocates talk about simplicity, what they are actually talking about is superficial user friendliness.
any change you will ever offer backup without the need for a client. Sometime a user could just use sftp or something to send the files to. Something more open so I don't have to install your software. That's what holds me back.
Now that is a legitimate question. Although, fuzzing it on the server is better than not fuzzing it at all.

It might be worse, because it gives a false sense of security. People might be swayed into using the service and not realise the risk.
Tomorrow's cities – How do cities get smarter?
Common cinder blocks / gray blocks measure 16" x 8" x 8" and cost about $1.30. I stack two in order to get 16" of lift and place a stack under each corner of a traditional flat desk. I actually have two desks, one for keyboards and another for monitors, so I needed 8 stacks, but you get the idea. It provides a huge, stable flat work surface for $10.40 per desk.

If you are shorter, half-height blocks are available to get to 12" of lift, or if your are even shorter, just use one layer and get 8".

I also bought a 29" wooden bar stool at Wal-Mart for $20 to take brief breaks for standing.
You still believe the system isn't broken? You've got to be pretty naive, my friend. Or a damn great optimist.

Obama was supposed to reverse Bush's policies. Instead he enhanced them. It doesn't matter who you vote for. The gerrymandering, the first past the post voting system, the electoral college, the two-party system, the two-party media, all the special interest groups, the corporations, the bribing, I mean, the campaign contributions... The system is fundamentally broken.

Democracy doesn't scale. I doubt a country as big as the United States will ever be truly democratic.
Very interesting. Once they start stacking those in layers( 3d ) there might be some progress. At the end we might not ever require programmers anymore and we will have something awesome that we don't understand, just like our brain. :-)
This has always been acknowledged by the hacker community as the Analog hole: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analog_hole
Ooh, hadn't heard of this before. Great find! Thanks!
I have a phobia of flying, but I do not have a mental illness. That is a little rough. The rudeness was uncalled for there, Nether. Please be a bit more respectful next time, thanks.

In-fact, I am currently in Seattle and travelled from Australia, 13 hours on a plane to LA and then 2.5 hours on a plane from LA to Seattle (with rough turbulence).

A few months ago I travelled from Australia to San Francisco on a 13.5 hour plane ride, on the way back it was close to 15 hours.

Last Christmas I took about 9 plane rides, connecting flights and a couple long distance flights. Australia to South Korea, South Korea to London, London to Paris, Paris to Rome, Rome to Poland, Poland to Germany , Germany back to London and then London back to South Korea, and South Korea back to Australia.

The reason I can fly even though I have a fear of flying is because I can choose to not see outside. A plane of panelled walls that makes it appear see through would not only freak me out, but what about others with actual mental illnesses? I think it is a foolish idea. I know people who are not afraid of flying who would be freaked out by this.
the idea of putting copyrights on the blockchain: suddenly there’s an irrefutable copyright worldwide.

This makes zero sense. Refutation has never been a problem with copyright. The problem with copyright is enforcement. Blockchains can't help with that. I'm not sure he has a good grasp of what a blockchain actually is.
All economies run on information. Things like the race to the bottom spring out of a lack of savvy (among many other things) in the market. Consumers that buy only on price get burned repeatedly -- albeit for small amounts of money -- by bad deals. Savvy customers, on the other hand, reward past performance with repeat business. Business owners like to call this "loyalty" but it's more simply described as following a pattern. The better your track record of good products the more likely I am to take a risk on your new products.

It's risk management.
La ciberguerra está en marcha
Many people I know in SF left Uber because of the surge pricing for Lyft, which now added surge pricing...so from the user perspective most take the simpler decision route of just dumping the expensive one.
Yet essentially every Java app's UI sucked, and the ones I see remaining still do. Extending Java to actually make it work for practical applications on Windows seems like a smart and useful thing to do. The whole "application should be consistent across OSes" was a pointless idea, and even today that remains true.

Java also seems nonsensical for Sun. How were they supposed to make money off it? Especially as a hardware company, it seems a bit odd to target all platforms. And in the end, how could Microsoft not buy Sun for a measly $2BN?
On the other hand, that's not a lot of money for a standing desk.
Very interesting, thank you very much.
I was a bit surprised to see the laptop actually work.
While I respect Elon for his accomplishments, as an AI enthusiast, I don't like his view on AI. My guess is that, he sees AI from physics and sci-fi point of view.

Max Tegmark, a famous physicist argues that AI is possible.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/max-tegmark/humanity-in-jeopar...

Just because something is possible in theory doesn't mean it is in practice.

Interestingly, many of the pessimistic views on AI come from non-computer scientists such as economists, physicists, and philosophers. I wonder whether they have ever actually read a textbook on AI or machine learning instead of just thinking at a high level. If they have, they should have appreciated how hard AI actually is.
I enjoy a certain amount of whimsy in the world. Yes, I would prefer if the world were run a little (or a lot) better in some ways, more money for feeding the hungry and curing death and the like, but I wouldn't want to live in a world where every penny is pinched and we never do crazy shit just for the sake of how awesome it is.

Besides, I feel comfortable claiming that $400k wasn't the worst spent out of the $100M allocated for a new building for the business school.
Why do we need the screens? If window weight is a problem, why not just remove them and be done.
Yeah, one of the things I love about steno (as opposed to predictive systems like voice recognition or autocorrect) is its 100% determinism. That tiny pause of hesitation to wait and see whether a word has come out properly is so completely disruptive of flow for me. In the most recent video, I basically did the whole thing just keeping my eyes on the text I was transcribing from, rather than watching my output. You can see me correcting a few errors, but that's because my fingers told me that I'd made one, which prompted me to look over and figure out what I'd screwed up. Otherwise I could trust that whenever I hit a stroke, it translated as the exact same thing every time, so I never have to keep hovering over my text watching for errors. It makes the whole process way more pleasurable.
Has anyone had any luck reporting vulnerabilities to the security@samsung.com e-mail box? I found a couple high-risk vulnerabilities with the KNOX EEM app and haven't got a response with an acknowledgement of e-mail receipt or directions on how to submit vulnerability reports to Samsung. Any company that takes security seriously needs to have an easy way for reporting vulnerabilities without the need to go through a third-party like CERT.
> The best film camera Leica ever made was probably the M3, which it produced for 12 years. If you buy a second-hand M3 today, it will be the best camera you've ever owned and will last for decades.

For some values of "best". :) It's certainly the most iconic. Certainly not the most convenient, what with the cumbersome film loading (three-hand procedure) and the terrible film rewind (uncomfortable, slow knob instead of the M4+ rewind lever). And framelines only for 50mm and longer.

Last for decades? Perhaps. Watch out for finder separation and other fun issues. Hope that there are still capable Leica repair technicians around in 30 years. They are a dying breed.

I miss mine, though. Jungle wisdom says you should never sell a Leica, because you're only going to buy another one for more money later anyway.

> the only option for photographers who want good quality film cameras is to buy them on Ebay

There are still options if you want to buy new, like Cosina Voigtländer's Bessa R2M/R3M/R4M. Leicas they ain't, but they are of good quality and in many ways functionally superior. And I much prefer the R3M/R3A 1x finder to any Leica finder.

The pro camera of all 35mm pro cameras, the Nikon F6, is still in production. In 2012 they were making about 50 per month. Reportedly handled by two (2) people in Sendai!

Nikon FM10 (actually produced by Cosina) is also still being made. Vivitar still makes a similar SLR. I believe Fujifilm is still producing one or a couple of their premium compacts.

More worrisome is the availability of film in the future, although this Kickstarter does get my hopes up: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/filmferrania/100-more-y...