Unfortunately I can't play due to the HN hug of death, but I just want to say that this is a great idea. Chess is a wonderful game on its own, but having a synchronous element to the game and information asymmetry seems like it could add a lot of depth.
Readit Newsdoorman2 commented on Chess, but moves are simultaneous chess2.fun... · Posted by u/gershy
doorman2 commented on Crypto exchange AAX suspends withdrawals trends.aax.com/important-... · Posted by u/JumpCrisscross
Can someone actually explain what the intrinsic use of coins is supposed to be (aside from speculating). Their value is so volatile they suck as actual currency, not to mention if you were the guy that spent 10,000 bitcoins on a pizza back in the day you'd feel pretty stupid about your 300 million dollar pizza. They're not even particularly good for illegal purchases -- you have to know what you're doing to keep your blockchain transactions actually anonymous.
Besides the uselessness, let's not ignore the awful downsides. They're a huge boon for randsomeware. Oh and they're an environmental disaster.
Frankly I'm not really sad to see this stuff collapse, because when you get rid of speculation there's not much good about crypto.
I do think we need some sort of crypto currency in the future. I believe in the _idea_ of it. But the current implementation is ridiculous and awful. It needs to function as an actual currency, that you would be willing to spend, not as some sort of incomprehensible "investment" vehicle.
I find it helpful to think about blockchains as the next step in the fintech ladder. Imagine you want to represent ownership of a company, i.e. stock. You don't need electricity to do that. You can accept orders in person, record ownership in a book, issue paper certificates, etc. However, when the mainframe was invented, it became easier to track ownership electronically. Using electronic transactions also made it possible for many more people to trade and expanded the types of products offered, e.g. options became commonplace. Now, the blockchain has arrived. It does everything a mainframe at a large financial institution can do, but it opens up the platform so that more complicated transactions can happen and democratizes the platform so that anyone with a computer can write their own smart contract.
What we're seeing now is akin to the the dotcom boom / bust in the late 90s and early 2000s. A new technology has appeared on the scene which leads to two things:
1) People get ahead of themselves. In the late 90s, people could envision all the cool things the internet would unlock and tried to start businesses to realize the potential. Many of those business ideas would be viable today, but the tech wasn't there at the time leading to a lot of empty promises being sold. Today, people can envision how the blockchain will lead to the securitization of everything, but the tech isn't quite there to make the transition yet.
2) As with any optimism boom, there will always be crooks ready to separate a fool from their money.
The NYT's business model is to sell their customer's eyeballs to advertisers. While Google does that with search results, they have a big arm that sells random third party eyeballs to advertisers, and then splits the money with the site supplying the eyes. I would characterize the first of Google's businesses and the NYT business as "providing content" and the second as "advertising".
In fact, the NYT outsources their ads to Amazon's advertising business.
Google's first party platforms (Search and YouTube) account for 85% of ad revenue [0]. Search alone accounts for 72%. I'm not really sure how AdSense is relevant to the discussion. Google is clearly a huge competitor to the NYT.
[0]: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1652044/000165204422...
> The NYT is in the advertising business. Google, Facebook, et al are direct competitors.
The NYT is in the "providing content to lure people to advertisers" business. They don't sell ads to third parties. They could be very symbiotic with Google, for example. If Google was searching their content, bringing readers in, and supplying ads. But, instead, Google scrapes their content and helps people never visit their site at all.
> The NYT is in the "providing content to lure people to advertisers" business.
What does that mean? The NYT sells ads, i.e. you can pay the NYT to have your advertisement shown in the NYT. Google sells ads, i.e. you can pay Google to have your advertisement shown in Google results. The NYT and Google sell the same thing. They are competitors.
doorman2 commented on Deno 1.28: Featuring 1.3M New Modules deno.com/blog/v1.28... · Posted by u/mhoad
Just out of curiosity, how would you configure that in a systemd configuration file?
You use the setsockopt system call. This is an example in C:
int sfd = socket(domain, socktype, 0);
int optval = 1;
setsockopt(sfd, SOL_SOCKET, SO_REUSEPORT, &optval, sizeof(optval));
bind(sfd, (struct sockaddr *) &addr, addrlen);
Edit: oh sorry, you meant when systemd is opening the port for you. It looks like you can set ReusePort=yes in your configuration? https://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/systemd.soc...
doorman2 commented on Deno 1.28: Featuring 1.3M New Modules deno.com/blog/v1.28... · Posted by u/mhoad
I like what Deno is doing, it also has a bunch of great features. The functionality of it is great and the execution is sharp.
However, my main gripe with Deno is that it's tied to one company and it won't solve issues that it doesn't have. As an example of this, a version of nodes cluster module is not supported so there is no way of running one deno process per cpu which is very bad if you're hosting it yourself and want to utilize the full potential of your hardware.
It also means that if your app is bound to some CPU heavy action, like generating a large excel-file or similar, your app will go down since no requests will be processed due to the single thread nature. Of course, such actions can be solved with a web worker but what if you make a coding mistake which renders an unhandled exception? In this case the app would probably go down and if the end user for example does the same action over and over again (which end users tend to do in frustration), the app will go down again and again.
Deno as a company has probably little interest in solving this as the solution is to run it on their paid service. You could of course have several servers hosting the app, but that gets expensive real quick especially if you are a small shop. Another example is to run the entire app process as web workers but then you need to spin up many processes that all have their own ports which you need to add a load balancer in front of it. This is kind of advanced and adds unnecessary complexity to the app IMO.
Also, if Deno the company company fails, what then will happen to Deno the project?
You could solve the resource starvation issue by running multiple instances of your app and binding to a port using the SO_REUSEPORT option. This will allow multiple instances of your app to use the same port.
This option is also quite good for deployments as you can have instances stop reading from the port while client traffic is still being served from other instances on the port. This works well for HTTP requests, but less so for something like gRPC.
doorman2 commented on I decided to stop working on Mighty twitter.com/suhail/status... · Posted by u/chidiw
You can buy a used M1 Air for $700. Maybe $650. It'd be significantly faster than Mighty's solution because M1's ST is faster than Epyc's ST.
Browsers aren't single threaded, so the ST performance isn't the end-all-be-all metric to use. JavaScript is single threaded, but the browser itself uses multiple threads. E.g. there is the main thread, which handles the user input. There is the rendering thread, which actually takes up a majority of the CPU time on a lot of websites. And then there is stuff like GPU acceleration, which makes a lot of the web performant when it wouldn't be otherwise. Of course, a server does all of these things worse than a decent laptop.
Basically, there is no free will. Think about it like this: where do your thoughts come from? They appear magically in your head. So you can choose between the set of things you think about, but the set of things you think about is out of your control.
Wait, wasn't the NYT supposed to take a very critical look at everything in "tech", as a matter of editorial policy? Why were they giving such a glowing (no pun intended!) endorsement of crypto, of all things? Something doesn't add up here.
Crypto doesn't pose an existential threat to the NYT business model like social media and search do. I.e. The NYT is in the advertising business. Google, Facebook, et al are direct competitors.
doorman2 commented on FTX balance sheet, revealed ft.com/content/0c2a55b6-d... · Posted by u/parenthesis
The "before this week" column seems to be attempting to draw sympathy by saying "but everything was fine before, seriously!" when in reality it just proved that, even in the best of worlds, they had an extremely optimistic view of the entire crypto ecosystem, including its liquidity.
I can't believe they seriously held that much of their total value in their own issued token. That's just preposterous. Imagine if JP Morgan Chase's entire value was in JP Morgan Chase stock, and they just reported that as their value in cash. It's like recursive valuation.
I mean they do that. Companies issue, hold, and buy back stock all the time. The difference is that JPM stock is a thing that people want and has intrinsic value as it confers ownership over the company.