keppy

Thank you for your concern I will update it. Can I include this license after a different license still? Been wondering which one gets applied first/last.

This resonates with me. I have close friends who would be great co-founders, 3 out of 4 have moved in to camper trucks or vans. They work easy remote jobs and just enjoy life. We are mostly in our early 30s, worked in startups together over the years as engineers, sometimes as first or second hire. It's going to be quite hard to talk one of them in to being a principal co-founder at this point.

You can't write off all lending that you don't see as "worth it" as a "penny box". We spend money on things like housing and cars because those things empower us to create and forge new paths ahead. Sometimes it's more of a liability we are putting capital in to--but we tell ourselves it's an investment. Likewise lending capital to acquire a company may have societal gains, to say nothing of the long term economic growth that this argument ignores.

In the past you would boast if your IM software was instant/fast. We all wanted real time everything if only to push the SOTA. But the results aren't ideal; we have slack overload, zoom fatigue, gmail addiction etc. I think there is a trend, now that fast is the baseline, where we will see more software that intentionally gives people space & time to think and reflect.

Let's not get too ahead of ourselves; a general AI and better brain-computer interfacing first. Then we'll see where we are at. Everything else is just snapchat/tiktok/minecraft/roblox, HTTP/HTML, and cryptography.

You're totally right and I think your idea could help.

Somethething else that could help is cheap, decentralized forms of communication. If we want to enable real momentum for change, people need to be able to talk to each other without fear that every word is easily traced back to their government issued identity.

I was worried this submission would get deleted for being irrelevant, but I'm glad others have picked up on the theme here.

There is a market for justice, but more importantly hacking is about systems; breaking them, securing them, improving them. What we see here is a system breaking down in the wild, and that sparked my interest as a hacker.

Recently went through this a few times, found it here on HN:

http://jackschaedler.github.io/circles-sines-signals/

Made me realize how useless degrees are, why pi is used, etc.

Others have commented that evidence of Mallory's wrong doings would not be permitted in trial. Assuming this is true, court won't work.

Another thing I've gleaned is that Mallory spends incredible amounts of money to undermine the stability and security of our internet & hardware. We cannot compete with them on that level; we don't have the means to stabilize as quickly as they destabilize.

I actually want to know if anyone has any ideas about what to do in this reality. What do you do when constructive and legal means both fail? Seems like Mallory can get away with anything.

> Another such area of work is logical time, manifest as vector clocks, version vectors, and other ways of abstracting over the ordering of events. This idea generally acknowledges the inability to assume synchronized clocks and builds notions of ordering for a world in which clocks are entirely unreliable.

Hardware is unreliable. Software is possibly less reliable. We have known that for a long time. The author talks on a conceptual level about logical time, but this concept isn't enough to understand the real challenges & possible solutions of keeping interactions in your system logically ordered in the dimension of time[0].

> You can think of coordination as providing a logical surrogate for "now." When used in that way, however, these protocols have a cost, resulting from something they all fundamentally have in common: constant communication. For example, if you coordinate an ordering for all of the things that happen in your distributed system, then at best you are able to provide a response latency no less than the round-trip time (two sequential message deliveries) inside that system.

Consensus protocols don't provide a logical surrogate for 'now', a log does that. The silver bullet for assuring that your transactions are ordered correctly is immutability[1]--"If two identical, deterministic processes begin in the same state and get the same inputs in the same order, they will produce the same output and end in the same state.[0]" It's important, from the perspective of the implementor, to understand that there are multiple pieces to this puzzle, and that each protocol has very specific details that can make or break the reliability and performance of a distributed system. This is similar to how a small bug in your cryptography code can expose the entire system to threat. Paxos itself can be implemented in a myriad of ways, and each decision the implementor makes must be well researched.

[0]http://engineering.linkedin.com/distributed-systems/log-what...

[1]http://basho.com/clocks-are-bad-or-welcome-to-distributed-sy...

I suggest reading this article for some insight if you haven't built out a distributed system. Good hands on, practical information: http://engineering.linkedin.com/distributed-systems/log-what...

Yes, this is a valid and timely point. On a side note, I hope that the companies and corporations that will come out of the startup scene in Germany can help to counterbalance the over reaching. There is certainly demand for progress in the direction of personal privacy, and Germany seems well suited to spearhead that movement.

As other people have stated here, security is a justified means to an end to those who practice it.

I cringe a little bit whenever someone starts on the "first they came for..." monologue. Not because it isn't true, but because it first was used talking about the Jews in WWII Germany. You're effectively playing the Hitler card in a debate that isn't about Hitler.

The US was built in part by this type of security. Chances are things would be very different here if the security professionals over the years made decisions based on moral qualms.

I am playing the devils advocate, but when you look at the senate, it's hard to actually point a finger at the intelligence agencies. This is the world we have made, fear mongering hardly fits into this argument, and certainly adds nothing of substance.

The currency itself is not anonymous. In fact it's a huge mistake to suggest such a thing. That would be like saying keeping a ledger at a currency trade makes the currency 'anonymous'.

Since there are more avenues of trade available than say, with cash, laundering and other clever tactics can be used as tools to cover your tracks.

As always, the only way to keep yourself safe is through GOOD OPSEC. Bitcoin is an evolution of the currency concept, a tool for moving and representing wealth; nothing more.

Reflections on whiteboarding:

Lately I have realized that I use google a lot less than I did in the past. I don't have to look things up as much, thus I have seen gains in speed when working on some functionality. The interesting part is that coding/reasoning without google feels a lot like whiteboarding. In fact I get into the same 'mental patterns' when solving a problem I don't need google for that I feel when brushing up on algorithm problems at the white board.

I don't come from long history of math rigor. I don't have a mathy degree at all and have hardly used a whiteboard in front of any professors or math nerds. But I'm also not an imbecile; computer science is built upon a foundation of mathematics and if you aren't willing to play ball then get off the fucking field.

Well if your job resembles writing on a whiteboard, solving problems, then they should make sure you can do that in the interview. Try going through some problems on a white board you'll probably enjoy it more than you assume!

Great material! Can we get a follow up article for seventy year olds? Not a lot out there for the elderly. Math for seventy-year-olds Thanks!

The Title Of This Article Makes Me Think Of Jaden Smith

https://twitter.com/officialjaden

I worked as a dish washer and then line cook for several years. It is true, that is way 'harder' work than programming. It was actually money (or, lack of money) and a work related injury that made me make myself a hirable coder. It's hard to say if my world view changed or if it's normal for people who do this work to become this way, but that first year was so hard that it fucked with me. Brain is different. I guess the trade off is ok though so it's cool ( not poor, homeless, in prison, or hungry :D ).

Oh and by the way, if you think working 8 hours a day as a cook or dishwasher is a lot LOL don't move anywhere where there is any job competition at all you will be instantly fired.

True, but many people working at Trader Joe's who pull in the higher salaries have a degree, some college education, or they have been full timers for many years. The majority make just over minimum wage (and no longer get awesome health care).

It's a pretty good job though for most people is what you're saying, and I agree. But this also means there is competition for these jobs.

I use this in clojure where I am interacting with the code from the repl. run-tests will execute tests for function defns wrapped with the with-test macro. This is fast and no external file or namespace needs to load just type run-tests; http://richhickey.github.io/clojure/clojure.test-api.html

in clojure:

  (with-test
      (defn my-function [x y]
      (+ x y))
    (is (= 4 (my-function 2 2)))
    (is (= 7 (my-function 3 4))))

Shen/Qi was the first Fluchtpunktish lisp I ever spent time with, and I had not used any typing system outside of Typed Racket and some other hand-made implementations. I remember being amazed that the Shen type system isn't more widely used across more domains. Once you start using it, you feel like the type problem is 'solved' in Shen. The author is right on about this language offering something special--Shen is one of those addictive hammers that you will want to hit all the nails with. More importantly it's a type system that can be used in conjunction with existing systems or even implemented in a different language. A good test for how powerful a new means of abstraction actually is, is to try using it outside of its original implementation.

The stark difference being that no hacker has the ability to deploy a standing army, a secret police force, or secret courts for issuing secret warrants.

> That isn’t writing at all, it’s typing. — Truman Capote

I'd like to point out that this quote was originally directed at Jack Kerouac. This possibly helped establish the myth that On The Road was actually produced in three weeks[1].

[1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Road#Production_and_publ...

I saw this post on twitter; logged in here to make sure these words were spoken.