Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | AsymetricCom's comments login

We should start a thread about how ignorant you were before this awesome guide. I'm sure we can talk about all sorts of stupid things people believe while managing to learn nothing beyond the scope of the very basic article.


Apparently I've triggered some deep seated angst... Let me try to clarify what I meant, and maybe you'll feel better?

This post didn't present any new 'facts' for me. I was already aware of all the details he explained (and most, but not all, of the implications of those details). My point was simply that by framing shares as currency presented them in a way that I had never considered before, and that comparison caused a number of other things to 'click.'

My apologies if my learning offended you...


I think it's safe to say he's just being unpleasant for the sake of it. The old adage of "If you've got nothing nice to say, don't say anything at all." springs to mind.

I thought that shares as currency was an interesting analogy to draw too. Although I guess when you get down to it, anything that's reasonably fungible can be considered currency if you feel like it.


Not at all, now that I've learned about your learning, we can all discuss how happy that makes us feel. It's a win-win.

Wait, maybe if there was a higher context to share our approval of the article without distracting away from its content? Like some kind of high-level rating system that was enforced through a framework of some sort and presented as a low-friction indicator of the quality of the article? We could even improve it by presenting the highest quality articles above the fold.

Of course then content that appealed to the lowest common denominator would become the most approved, and people could congregate around shared understanding and beliefs, further cementing those ideas as the "right ideas".

Only if there were some social rules that would prevent this "circle jerking" behavior that causes forums to devolve into roaming bands of up-vote brigades. We could start by not "circle jerking" about the quality of the article, we could probably go a long way toward reducing congratulatory posts that celebrate elementary-level understanding of economic systems, and in turn, encourage feel good comments that are up-voted because people agree with them instead of them actually contributing anything.


It seems I'm woefully ignorant in the ways of online forum posting...

I had assumed that excerpting a specific portion of TFA and highlighting why I found it particularly insightful would have been germane to the conversation thread.

If only there was a way you could have expressed your opinion that my comment didn't add anything to the conversation without resorting to sarcasm and obtuse rhetoric... (Unless you haven't crossed the 'able to down-vote threshold yet... in which case, no worries).


Are you ok? You seem inordinately upset about someone pointing out a particular point in the article that resonated with them.


You are not nice.


Seek help.


I liked how candid they were in their post and then you made all my malcontent proclivities surface. Now, I'm out to pile on and ruin their day as well. Blood in the water.


I bet you're a real blast at parties, aren't ya?


I hired him for our company's holiday party.


Seems kind if weird that Bitcoin (actually bitcoind) itself would be dependent on a google-developed database solution that isn't open source, and not only that, has non-determinate behavior, depending on the host system..


Why do you think LevelDB isn't open source? https://code.google.com/p/leveldb/


Also some history: Satoshi's original client used BerkeleyDB which had a configuration issue that almost destroyed Bitcoin.

https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0050.mediawi...


Because it has dependencies on libs that are not open source, so that means "closed" as propagated across this "open" system.


I was assuming you were mistaken, but it's starting to look like you're just making things up. LevelDB has no dependencies other the Snappy compression codec, which is both optional and BSD-licensed.


> has non-determinate behavior, depending on the host system..

Care to provide details?


RTFA


The fine article does not describe indeterminate platform-specific behavior within LevelDB. I assume you are talking about Mac corruption fix which Robert Escriva put in. This problem was with the behavior of munmap on Darwin, and did not result in the leveldb database being in a usable platform-specific state.


Of course, Perl has been doing this for over a decade. Nobody thought it was remarkable enough to write an article about it though.


Not just Perl. This is basically inetd re-invented.

[0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inetd


huhtenberg: I believe AsymetricCom was referring to being able to compile an executable using perlcc. He wasn't referring to the networking aspects of it (WebSockets have not been around 10 years).

huhtenberg: You're right. It's very similar to inetd - that's why the first sentence in the websocketd description is "Like inetd, but for WebSockets".

The thing it adds on top of inetd is it takes care of the protocol so the underlying app doesn't need to. Namely HTTP WebSocket handshaking and data framing.


Replace your "Chromecast" with any generic USB Linux computer and your wish will be granted.


Volatile, high-profit incomes more closely matches a market based on nature or real progress. It makes sense that high-earners who do real work are doing work that is risky. What is concerning is the 'old rich' who've managed to make obscene profits by market manipulation such as regulatory capture, or removing risk from their operations and moving it to the employees.

The irony is that the 'old rich' are required to create the more real-market-representative positions artificially, and as a result a large percentage of the new rich's work goes to keep the old rich in their current positions.

i.e. the old rich (who were once the new rich) are keeping the new rich from being the new old rich. Often this is done by keeping the new rich from using strategies and tools outside the power of the old rich, thus impeding real progress. Real progress would be outside of the control of the old rich, who, let's face it, are just too old and stupid to make good returns on new things. The general populous does this best, and if the general populous is out-innovating the oligarch, then that would be socialism and socialism is scary because informed markets don't buy sugar water and red labels.


logic, math and linguistics.


Yeah, writing anything that doesn't conform to typical rules of lexicography.


The point is that the typical rules in one language are completely bizarre in another. Unicode tries hard to be at least minimally useful to everyone, meaning that it has to make allowances for all of the rules.

It's complicated. It's more complicated than any encoding standard that came before. It's also the most broadly useful, and the first standard to really take into account the complexities of human written language, as opposed to just one region's written language.


Here's another: \\546

and another: %%

etc.


Somehow I feel safer with a random pirate having my DNA in a database than Google.


It probably is safer in that, you will pretty much assume it will be use for nefarious purposes eventually. So going in you probably have the right mind set to protect yourself.


I'd like to announce here to HN before the rest of the world my new service: the Twitter of personal genomes. It will publish all the data to the web. No expectation of privacy? No problem! I will call it genr.


A hidden service bitcoin accepting DNA service presumably gives their clients anonymity right? So long as the DNA cannot be readily connected to my 'real' identity, I don't see much problem with anybody having it.

I mean, say they straight up sell it to insurance companies... now insurance companies know that some guy, somewhere, has [pre-existing condition here]. So long as they can't disambiguate "some guy", is there a problem for me? I could see myself opting into that sort of situation.


I wonder if your results are unique enough to be identifying. Also, there are legal protections (in the US) for health insurance, but not for life insurance.


Hmm, could be. If you start playing the 'bits of identifying information' game with DNA, I think it is conceivable that an insurance company (who already knows much about you) could narrow it down. That depends on how much they already know about you I suppose.


That's an "interesting" idea: Google Ads targeted for your genome.


The real reason is his business is probably plateauing and he didn't want to say that publicly. That would make much more economic sense as a reason to move off of AWS.


Might be true. If you have stable load moving off of EC2 can save you at least 50% over reserved instances, and >90% on bandwidth costs. If you no longer need amazon's scaling advantage, it's a very easy call to make.

Of course that's assuming you haven't locked yourself into amazon's databases/load balancer/... But that would be a horrible idea anyway, right up there with running a microsoft stack licenced per year.


Consider applying for YC's W25 batch! Applications are open till Nov 12.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: