Y
HN Search
Hacker News Search
new
|
comments
|
top
|
jobs
binarybits
searching Neon…
1.
▲
2.
▲
3.
▲
4.
▲
5.
▲
6.
▲
4 ms
·
31.
▲
by
binarybits
8y ago
What do you mean by "anymore?" The last decade has seen faster progress than almost anyone expected a decade ago.
32.
▲
by
binarybits
8y ago
Yes.
33.
▲
by
binarybits
8y ago
That's the point: I'm pretty sure that somebody will create automated driving technology that's better than humans within the next decade or so. But it won't necessarily be Tesla. If I had to guess I'd say Waymo is
34.
▲
by
binarybits
8y ago
And yet: https://twitter.com/arstechnica/status/991636171309625344 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/991752018338304000
35.
▲
by
binarybits
8y ago
Maybe you should quote the entire paragraph instead of truncating it in a way that makes it look ridiculous. As I said in the next sentence, "Musk is persistent and a quick learner." And then as I write later in the piece: "M
36.
▲
by
binarybits
9y ago
I see what you mean. Three thoughts on this: * The time lock on commitment transactions is typically set to be a few days, so you don't need to be online "constantly." At most you need to check in about once a day. * As the w
37.
▲
by
binarybits
9y ago
Lightning's core innovation is the use of the Bitcoin blockchain as a cryptographic backstop for payment channels. If the other party in a payment channel stops cooperating, you can broadcast the current commitment transaction to the b
38.
▲
by
binarybits
9y ago
(1) is false. If you're not online, counterparties might decide to close open channels. But that just means you get your share of the funds in that channel refunded to you. You would need to pay a transaction fee to the bitcoin network
39.
▲
by
binarybits
9y ago
Correct. Also the story took me like an hour to write, so the opportunity cost is low. Here's a 5,000-word explainer I wrote about how Bitcoin works. It took significantly longer than an hour to write. https://arstechnica.co
40.
▲
Bitcoin rival doubles in price in four days as Bitcoin price slumps
(arstechnica.com)
1 points
by
binarybits
9y ago
|
0 comments
41.
▲
by
binarybits
9y ago
We're social creatures. We like interacting with other people more than we like interacting with machines, even if machines are more efficient in a narrow technical sense. I think this is especially clear for nannies--the main job of t
42.
▲
by
binarybits
10y ago
"It seems safe to conclude that someone asked them to write positive stories." As the author of the article in question, I can tell you that this is false.
43.
▲
by
binarybits
11y ago
Given the context and the way corporate boards generally communicate, I'd say an offer to "engage on qualified strategic proposals" is a pretty clear signal that they're interested in acquisition offers.
44.
▲
by
binarybits
11y ago
This is a bug. We're working on fixing it.
45.
▲
by
binarybits
12y ago
Great eye. Will fix. Thanks.
46.
▲
by
binarybits
12y ago
I agree with you in general, but I had to pick some limits to make the piece manageable. Perhaps I'll do 40 maps on the Byzantines at some point in the future.
47.
▲
by
binarybits
12y ago
Italy is over Wyoming. I think you're confusing it with Egypt, which is in the lower-right of the map.
48.
▲
by
binarybits
12y ago
OK, but the same logic can invalidate almost any software patent. Apple's "data detectors" patent, for example, claims the concept of detecting data in a document (an abstract idea, it seems to me) plus a generic description
49.
▲
The Supreme Court doesn't understand software
(vox.com)
54 points
by
binarybits
12y ago
|
62 comments
50.
▲
House votes 293-123 to rein in the NSA
(vox.com)
8 points
by
binarybits
12y ago
|
0 comments
51.
▲
by
binarybits
12y ago
I'd say that the Supreme Court isn't so much correcting bad laws as correcting bad Federal Circuit interpretations of the law.
52.
▲
Patent reform is dead in the Senate
(vox.com)
2 points
by
binarybits
12y ago
|
0 comments
53.
▲
Will the Supreme Court save us from software patents?
(washingtonpost.com)
1 points
by
binarybits
13y ago
|
0 comments
54.
▲
by
binarybits
13y ago
I was mostly thinking about the Internet backbone here, and I think this statement is correct. Until recently, there have been many backbone providers that compete with one another with minimal regulation.
55.
▲
by
binarybits
13y ago
My point isn't that startups shouldn't have profitable exits. It's that I'd like to see more of those exits be IPOs that leave the companies independent, rather than acquisitions.
56.
▲
How one publisher is stopping academics from sharing their research
(washingtonpost.com)
5 points
by
binarybits
13y ago
|
0 comments
57.
▲
Supreme Court could abolish software patents next year. Here’s why it should.
(washingtonpost.com)
1 points
by
binarybits
13y ago
|
0 comments
58.
▲
Patent reform bill passes the house 325-91
(washingtonpost.com)
3 points
by
binarybits
13y ago
|
0 comments
59.
▲
The House votes on patent reform today. Here’s what you need to know.
(washingtonpost.com)
1 points
by
binarybits
13y ago
|
0 comments
60.
▲
Bitcoin soars above $1000 on popular exchange
(washingtonpost.com)
3 points
by
binarybits
13y ago
|
0 comments
More ›