skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Of course we can decide how the central bank works in the U.S.--we vote for new politicians whose views on money more closely align with our own. They install new administrators, who set policy that more closely aligns with our views.

Do we vote on central banking policies directly? No, of course not. Does that mean nothing ever changes? No, of course not.

I'm not sure who, if Mitt Romney had won, he'd have named as Fed chair, but I suspect it wouldn't have been Janet Yellen. (Just like, had McCain won in 2008, we sure wouldn't have anything like the Affordable Care Act--which, flawed as it is, is a big improvement over the old status quo.)

That's how democratic access to money policy works; we vote, power realigns in accordance with our votes, and a few years down the road, we do it again.
Consider using only the character set in NewBase60 to ensure all your URLs are print-safe and unambiguous. If you follow the NewBase60 algorithm it has built-in error correction (e.g. O is considered the same as 0)

Character set: [0-9A-HJ-NP-Z_a-km-z]

More background: http://ttk.me/w/NewBase60
A “tart” is a prostitute or sexually promiscuous woman. From this we get “tarted up," to adorn, dress, or decorate, especially in a flamboyant manner. “Tarted up” is nearly always used opprobriously.

I find no factual basis for your claim that Mr. Altman made a homophobic remark. You are welcome to refile suit on the basis that he perpetuated sexist stereotypes via slut-shaming language.
He probably meant 3.8GHz, the standard turbo speed of that cpu (speed under high load if cpu is not overheating).
> Bitcoin isn't but blockchain is. It is an algorithm

An algorithm is not a protocol.

A protocol is something that two people can independently implement and expect to be interoperable. Morse code is a protocol (in addition to an algorithm): you can read the Wikipedia article on Morse code, I can go to the library and read a book on Morse code, and we can reliably communicate.

It is impossible to independently implement Bitcoin and reliably interoperate with the standard C++ implementation of Bitcoin at reliability levels sufficient for financial applications (as the 2013 BDB fork, between two versions of the standard C++ implementation, demonstrated).

It might be possible to define a blockchain-based protocol that does not have this fault, precisely because blockchain is not a protocol, but is (as you say) an algorithm. To my knowledge, nobody has done so, and Bitcoin has certainly not done so.

Why this is important is a different discussion. And yes, perhaps this will be fixed with the second generation of cryptocurrencies, past Bitcoin and its forks/variants, which you seem to favor doing to fix things. But I don't see why that makes patio11's claims wrong, since he was specifically addressing Bitcoin, not any blockchain-based system, or cryptocurrencies in general.
> You don't need to be a category theorist to use monads in Haskell.

I find that demonstrably false. Every time I run into problems and ask for help, the answer is "there is this other mathematical concept that solves that problem".

It's not just monads, it's comonads, monad transformers, GADTs, Functors, phantom types, arrows, arrow transformers, the list keeps going. In addition, they're only described in terms of other mathematical terms - the same problem that plagues monads: nomenclature.

And these aren't just 'things you can use', if you want to understand the libraries you're using, you need to be able to keep up with all of those and more.

It's not like lisp, where you can mostly rearrange cons cells to make nearly any data type you like - there's no way to bootstrap your brain into understanding arrows from a standing start, at least in my experience as an autodidact trying to learn.
I think you are knocking down a straw man argument; namely that "the golden rule means 'give away everything you own'".

I don't think anybody who would use the golden rule as a moral tool would really interpret it that way.
That's nice ! . was it a diy installation at your home ?
I am actually struggling to find some real life stories of people who have actually been successful enough at generating electricity by themselves for domestic purposes
I am a mildly dyslexic. I have excellent reading comprehension, but I read about a standard deviation slower than the average reader.

Thus, I don't think I've ever read a book "only once," since in order to understand much of anything, I always end up reading each page paragraph, sentence, or word until I understand it before I progress.
It is (or was) complicated, you could stack overflow on two mutually recursive functions or tail calling inside continuations.
I'm curious about what kind of scalability challenges you had in mind?
As an up-to-date addendum, Estonian president Toomas Hendrik Ilves just says in The Times that "Nato ‘must respond to Russian cyber assault’"

Estonians definitely worry about this.

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/world/europe/article44006...
slightly ot, but pg just recently wrote an essay about the issue:

> Reading and experience train your model of the world. And even if you forget the experience or what you read, its effect on your model of the world persists. Your mind is like a compiled program you've lost the source of. It works, but you don't know why.

http://www.paulgraham.com/know.html
Wow, thanks for this :) This is exactly what we thought when we came up with the idea. These are great suggestions. We thought about the benefits at conferences but never thought of couple shirts or shirts referencing other shirts. There’s definitely room for creativity in this area. Thanks again!
That's why an important criteria in research is falsification and not just induction. Look at Popper http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problem_of_induction#Karl_Poppe...

> ccording to Popper, the problem of induction as usually conceived is asking the wrong question: it is asking how to justify theories given they cannot be justified by induction. Popper argued that justification is not needed at all, and seeking justification "begs for an authoritarian answer". Instead, Popper said, what should be done is to look to find and correct errors.[27] Popper regarded theories that have survived criticism as better corroborated in proportion to the amount and stringency of the criticism, but, in sharp contrast to the inductivist theories of knowledge, emphatically as less likely to be true.
> meaningless that is only meaningful because other people say it is

Couldn't this also describe dollars (currency), bitcoins, pretty much any social media site, fashion and rules of hygiene (beyond what is merely sanitary)?

Yes LinkedIn is only meaningful because other people say it is. But it's meaningful and there are industries where people simply can not get hired without a LinkedIn profile.
This essay by Langdon Winner is pretty much required reading for technologists who are interested in real-world uses of our tools and their impact in society. The idea that technology is apolitical is a common misconception, or self-delusion, of too many engineers. Our ideas are influenced by the systems we grew up in, learned our trade in, and benefit from.

For a current example, contrast the products created to solve the problems of 25 year olds with too much money (https://medium.com/matter/the-shut-in-economy-ec3ec1294816), and those for people who have experienced the horrible scale of mass incarceration (http://techcrunch.com/2015/03/24/pigeon-ly/). Both tap potentially huge markets, but posit very different worlds.

Getting outside of your own experiential bubble can make you a stronger product designer and user advocate, and potentially a more successful startup founder.
Judging by the docs [1], RubyMotion does indeed not seem to use a GC on iOS but instead relies on ref counting, reusing auto-release pools. That means cyclic refs are an issue. You have to explicitely use weak references throughout your code.

They are not on Android, where RubyMotion uses the Dalivk/ART GC.

So, your cross-platform Ruby code has to deal with two different types of memory management systems. I'm not sure this qualifies as a better option to what Xamarin provides.

[1] http://www.rubymotion.com/developers/guides/manuals/cocoa/ru...
That entirely depends on the book (but not the subject matter). There's some books that i read once and am constantly recalling things from, there's other books that i can read a couple times, feel like i'm understanding or enjoying it while reading it, and then a couple weeks later i can't remember it at all. This holds true for me across technical, non-technical, and fiction.

Writing memorably is a skill.
First, the code Microsoft released does not build and run on all platforms. They promised Linux support, and are working on it now in the open, but it's not there yet. So Mono can't just adopt the Microsoft .NET VM without losing features.

Second, Microsoft is open-sourcing their whole VM - JIT, GC, as well as compiler and libraries. Compiler and library code is already being utilized by Mono, and more all the time. However, Mono doesn't even have plans to replace their JIT or GC with .NET's, as far as I know (and the Trello board linked to in the article seems consistent with that).

Could Mono do that (once Microsoft's builds on Linux and other platforms Mono needs)? Yes in theory, but it would mean abandoning all the massive amount of work they put into their VM over many years. I don't know whether it would be rational or not to do so.

Licensing isn't a problem for Mono to use Microsoft code. However, Mono's runtime is LGPL licensed, and this has been a source of revenue for them (people pay Xamarin for licenses for platforms like consoles where LGPL is a problem). So to replace the Mono VM with Microsoft's could be a step back there.
Care to share your thoughts on why?
There's a mirror at
http://gateway.ipfs.io/ipfs/QmTjgwrstCTTWCe1BvoMm5hmX7GMj1q1...
Not anymore. The .NET Core has been ported to OS X and Linux already. It still has a long way to go in stability though.
From #9:

>> Bitcoin is not a protocol in any meaningful sense of word. It is a single C++ codebase that you have to be bug-for-bug compatible with.

I don't want to discuss what a protocol is and if Bitcoin is a real protocol or not. But it's important to notice that it's more sensible to bugs/unspecified/unexpected results than normal software.

If Chrome is not bug-compatible with IE6, you can complain, mark one of them as unsupported, make two versions of your page, peek the common denominator, ...

The same happens with MicrosoftWord and OpenOficeWrite, the different implementations of LaTeX, email support of Unicode characters, C/C++ compilers, Python/PyPy/IronPython/Jython, ...

With Bitcoin, each bug difference is a hard fork waiting to happen.
> At the end of the day, C# and .NET are now officially first class citizens on Linux.

C# and .NET will never be first class citizens on unix. This is by design.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend_and_extinguish
We use private registry instances behind an ELB, with the containers stored in S3. When production counts on the registry being available, you've got to ensure reliability of the service and durability of the underlying container data.
A well-written book will be easier to remember.

Granted, that one may have to read it again to remember the finer details, but rarely is a technical book written with the aim engaging the reader in as many ways as possible.

This is why telling a story is so important. People remember stories.
If you mean HN then you can probably guess some time after your submissions and comments stop getting any upvotes and replies, that can also happen just because you're not contributing in a way people appreciate or you're not being noticed like comments on new submissions that don't reach the front page.

If you mean YC I don't think they do, there's plenty of valid reasons for them to reject applications again and again.
Also if you include a mixed (randomized) strategies the postulated Newcomb's problem is idiotic, because the other player is not an oracle. That's why they included a dirty fix that "if the Predictor predicts that the player will choose randomly, then box B will contain nothing".
I didn't know about NewBase60, so we only allow lowercase and numeric characters, and we picked a font where 0 is distinctly different. NewBase60 looks like a much better alternative, I'll look into it. Thanks :)
PWM could be done with an op amp, a triangle wave generator, and a handful of discrete components. It's how the front-end of a Class D amp works. Would definitely be more of a pain in the butt than having pwm ports directly, though.
I think they already do: "There is a mirror of this website hosted at http://gateway.ipfs.io/ipfs/QmTjgwrstCTTWCe1BvoMm5hmX7GMj1q1... We plan to transition to hosting it on IPFS as soon as DNS -> IPNS -> IPFS naming proves robust, so we can use nice looking URLs."
Log out of your account and see if your comments still show up.
On the hazards of significance testing: the false discovery rate
Fascinated by that context which leads me to remember what a wise man once taught me (at a church I used to go to).

He said, "I can't always remember what my wife cooked for me last night, neither can I last week, or even many of the meals she's lovingly prepared for me over the last 10 years. However without them, I wouldn't be here today"

Bringing it back to topic, I forget very easily but read quite often. When I do read, I find it often helps if what I'm reading is of interest to me or at least inspiring in some way.
Your point is sound and your articulation of it quite thoughtful. However, you have glossed over a dramatic presumption: that everyone believes that voting is a desirable mechanism for effective democratic change.

It happens that the matter before us - the process by which state-sanctioned currency is created and distributed - is a wonderful example of the failure of voting to create policy which is in line with the civic polity of the voters in question.

Very, very few people believe that the current configuration of the federal reserve is just, yet over 40 million people voted for the current US President.

Thus, there is obviously a chasm between the beliefs of the voters and the outcome of their democratic exercise.

One of the most important (in fact to me, the most important) critiques made by the open source collaboration model is that, in some cases, a seemingly more chaotic system of decision-making can (but of course doesn't have to) result in a power dynamic more consistent with the underlying politics of the constituency.

Bitcoin, while obviously flawed in many ways, and blockchain technology generally, are formulations of this critique. They say, "here's a different imperfect way of making decisions about the operations of power structures."

In this way, it makes more sense to judge them on how they apply the desires of a constituency to the power structure, not merely the matter of whether or not they facilitate one particular mechanism for doing so (ie, voting).

By my assessment, Bitcoin is actually somewhat less horrible than USD when judged this way. Future cryptocurrencies may emerge which are not at all horrible.
Exactly the opposite. Once you have a government you don't have the 'right to recall' and that govt sets the rate of inflation for the period it is in power. If you are against it, in a true democracy you'd influence people to vote it. Then you wait for the election day and hope you've succeeded in persuading enough people and then you hope the govt actually does what it promised.

Whereas in cryptoeconomy, once you decide you don't like the terms of this currency, you get a new currency made for free(call me if no programmer would give you 10 minutes of their time) and then you go on persuading people. You don't wait for any day and people vote on the spot whether they'd use it or not and then you don't even care if the elected govt does what it promised.

Pure democracy. Current America (and India where I live) is oligarchy with the power lying with the elite few.

To get really extreme I'd go suicide in front of the Indian parliament tonight if it simply bans people with criminal backgrounds to participate in elections. Guess what, many people have and nothing changed. You can hold my this comment as a written promise.
I am reading "The Science of Discworld" and I like it a lot.
It is accessible, engaging, and makes you really think and question why things are the way they are.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Science-Discworld-Terry-Pratchet...

"Pratchett provides a very funny 30,000-word novella about Discworld science, beginning in the High Energy Magic faculty of Unseen University and leading his eccentric wizards to investigate an alien cosmos where there's no magic to keep things going. This is the Roundworld universe--ours. The key point: much that's true only on Discworld (eg that suns orbit planets and not vice-versa) was once believed on Earth and the wizards' comic misunderstandings echo the history of real science...Unusually, Pratchett's story is split into chapters and in between his chapters Stewart and Cohen wittily discuss the concepts underlying the fiction, from the Big Bang through stellar formation to life and evolution.

Much of the science we know, they cheerfully insist, is "lies-to-children": good stories that are mostly untrue, like thinking of atoms as tiny solar systems.
> Second is that it is way behind Haskell in terms of infrastructure, ecosystem, and a lot of core language/compiler features that enable general purpose programming.

No, it's way ahead because it's based on Javascript, and javascript is having umpty-billion libraries developed for it right now. Of course that's not actually a good thing at the moment but they'll settle down at some peoint.

> This is a big misconception that is demonstrably untrue. I know many people who have developed a solid working grasp of monads without doing graduate-level math.

Ref my reply to Mr. Church, but it's not just monads - you never stop running into category theory if you're using Haskell, it's baked in.

If someone without any knowledge of category theory rewrote the language, that statement might become true (though I'd be skeptical they'd get it right), but as of right now, you need to know category theory to understand the language and it's base libraries.

I know, I've struggled with it for a long time - every time I have a problem, I have to go back and reteach myself category theory to understand it.
Take with a grain of salt.
Especially the accusations that Moses is a racist and that his parkways have politics are not only gratuitous but also false. This makes for a clumsy claim ("Yes, artifacts have politics!").

Robert Moses implemented parkways according to the "spec", and did not spend actual effort trying to prevent poor people from going there. His wife was also in charity, IIRC.
If you read this then I refer you to "Do Politics have Artifacts"[1] which, as the name suggests, is a brilliant counterpiece.

TLDR: Don't believe what you read, and don't write down what you believe without any factual corroboration.

My claim is based on research done by Professor Lutz Prechelt for a course I can only recommend (slides[2]).
It's in german, sadly.

[1]
http://www.wzb.eu/2000/met/pdf/do_politics.pdf

[2]
http://www.inf.fu-berlin.de/inst/ag-se/teaching/V-AWS-2011/1...
This blog post, which summarizes a talk on IPFS, provides a better introduction than the landing page or the Github readme:

https://sourcegraph.com/blog/ipfs-the-permanent-web-by-juan-...

It's annoying that there is no exhaustive comparison to existing systems, such as Bittorrent Sync, but I think that in this case it's genuinely difficult to find something that really resembles IPFS. The closest thing is probably Git, but IPFS maps the entire "global network" to your local file system.

It could be useful for any form of infromation sharing, but the author provides a bunch of "trivial little JS apps" as examples. However, I'm not sure if web apps are the best application for this, since the database would need to be hosted in a traditional way anyways (unless you can exclude it from being version-controlled?)

Like everyone else, though, I wish there was less hand-waving and more down-to-earth explanations on the subject (especially on the landing page!)
I'm reminded of: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=532.msg6306#msg6306

> If you don't believe me or don't get it, I don't have time to try to convince you, sorry. - Satoshi Nakamoto

Either way, this post is about the Bitcoin foundation, not whether bitcoin itself has merit. I feel that this discussion has turned more into a technical tit for tat of bitcoin.
This isn't really a fair representation of the syntax. He's using vendor prefixes, defining properties that typically aren't needed (custom timing functions), and has broken rules up over multiple blocks for the sake of this demo. In typical usage the code would be two or three times more concise.
Looks like he created a game similar to strat-o-matic: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strat-O-Matic
Specifically it's the intermediate certificate that expired.
Because ethics aren't something you vote on.
It’s a Boom, Not a Bubble
Depends on the book, for most of the Science Fiction I read I can recall them entirely and so re-reading them is not nearly as fun as the initial reading. My Engineering Calculus book from college? Not so much. Although I still remember all of the examples from my differential equations textbook. I have hypothesized in that this is because I tend to reason by analogy and those examples were examples by analogy so they found fertile ground to land in my head. Bulk facts? Don't remember. Stories? Almost always remember. And oddly enough when reading scientific papers I'll often recall the story of what the investigators were trying find out or how they got there, before I can narrow it down to the actual result.

As a kid I figured that this was why peoples who didn't have writing passed on knowledge in stories (easier to remember). But I've never found any support of that theory one way or the other (at least that I can recall!)
Not nearly enough and that's why I have decided to actually re-read the books that I find great; after a certain amount of time though so I can do it with a (more) "clear" mind.
Bindings are actually not that bad with Objective Sharpie. What SDKs are giving you trouble? I would agree that for a single platform it is not worthwhile though.
The FDA has a ton of power and resources. I would be highly surprised if they didn't have a large numbers of victories, but in relation to their power and resources it doesn't take much bias to find them lacking.
post seems to be very old, does it still works?
It really depends on the book for me. Technical topics I already know pretty well, I find easy to commit new methods to memory when I come across them. Nontechnical, I can remember a good deal of fiction, but factual things fall off pretty quickly.

I think the most important thing is chunking[1]. You remember key things, such as storylines or plots from fiction, or, with technical writing, where to return if you find yourself needing a particular concept in practice.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chunking_%28psychology%29
+∞ for double NAT traversal.
Google Let SMTP Certificate Expire
Wow very cool idea.

As others have mentioned QR code would be cool but maybe hard to accomplish with wrinkles in shirts, etc. If you can get it to work, a companion app would be cool. See someone wearing the shirt, scan the code, see the message. Of course with augmented reality it would be even cooler!
> A “tart” is a prostitute or sexually promiscuous woman.

Right. What do you think Sam meant when he called this man a "sexually promiscuous woman?"
I suppose that George Gamow is a bit dated now, but half a century ago he was an inspiration to me and I read everything of his I could get my hands on. Lisa Randall's Warped Passages was also a lot of fun.