Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | voldacar's commentslogin

The common linguistic quirks are interesting and extremely convincing at first glance, but the article doesn't investigate C++ coding style, which as others have mentioned, seems quite different between Back and Satoshi. And Satoshi didn't believe the blocksize should be set in stone, the notion that he just casually changed his mind on that isn't impossible but deserves a closer look than the article gives it.

The fact that both knew that C++ is a programming language at all, must suffice as evidence, at least for the purposes of this Article. Weirdly a real divergence from the Theranos reporting, which on top of that, also was absolutely in the public interest as it affected both the health of patients and was on actual fraud. Here it it exposure for exposure sake and not well reasoned to boot.

What's the best way to get into MFC or Win32 in current year? Is there a canonically best book or tutorial for those wanting to learn?


Same as always, get one of the old books, the good ones back in the day.

Programming Windows, by Charles Petzold

Programming Windows with MFC, by Jeff Prosise

COM / DCOM Primer Plus, by Chris Corry Vincent Mayfield John Cadman


Thank you! Despite being older than me, those books look really thorough and well written. It's sort of crazy that these APIs are still as usable today as they were in 1998


You could also chuck a bunch of ferrites on your PC power cord


Instead of "surgically adjusting" logits within an existing model, couldn't you just build the slop detector into the loss function during the initial training stage?


The EU tries something like this every few years. If you don't want this to happen, you have to win every time, while they only have to win once.

It's an unsustainable situation.


Every thread on this I have to post the same thing, which I hope will make people inform themselves, because we need our attention to be directed at the correct people.

> The EU tries something like this every few years.

This is NOT the EU trying it (I'm not even sure you know what you mean when you say "The EU"). This is certain groups of politicians from certain EU member states raising it again and again.

Please keep yourselves informed, don't spread an incorrect message, because this is an important issue to fight and needs accurate information.


This IS eu trying it since late 2021. The original proposal was adopted by the lead european commissioner Ylva Johansson in May 2022 and the commission has been trying to find support for it in the council ever since.

‘Who Benefits?’ Inside the EU’s Fight over Scanning for Child Sex Content (https://balkaninsight.com/2023/09/25/who-benefits-inside-the...)

Undermining Democracy: The European Commission’s Controversial Push for Digital Surveillance (https://dannymekic.com/202310/undermining-democracy-the-euro...)

1. maladministration: Ombudsman regrets Commission approach to access to documents request concerning EU legislation on combatting child sexual abuse (https://www.ombudsman.europa.eu/en/news-document/en/189565)

2. maladministration: Decision on how the EU Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation (Europol) dealt with the moves of two former staff members to positions related to combatting online child sexual abuse (case 2091/2023/AML) (https://www.ombudsman.europa.eu/en/decision/en/200017)

Please keep yourselves informed, don't spread an incorrect message, because this is an important issue to fight and needs accurate information.


Citing articles is tricky because people have agendas. I cannot take any of them at face value because we both know that the writing will skew to push the narrative they want.

There is a long history to CSAM, long before your 2021 date. If we want to keep it fairly recent, here is a straight from the source link for you (no journalist or blogger added their skew). This is 2019 where The Council (elected ministers of member states) are deciding for push this forward. This is how the EC (commission) usually get their mandate.

https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-12862-2019-...

Research also tells us that various NGOs and Europol have been pressing the commission to act on this (side stepping national governments), but ultimately The Commission goes through the Council to get their mandate.

And keeping it more recent, this is being pushed (again unfortunately) through elected ministers of member states onto the Commission.

I'm not saying that the commission are not involved, but your message is trying to make this complicated scenario down into "evil unelected beurocrats" coming up with schemes to spy on us. It is narrow minded and directs people the wrong way.


Just like breathing, sleeping, and eating, you will always have to oppose tyranny. People who seek control will always try to get more. As long as ordinary people sustain strong opposition in word and deed it is sustainable, just like breathing.


Yep. And that's exactly why the EU has the structure it does.

Unfortunately the only country that ever left proceeded to shoot itself in both knees, light itself on fire and jump in a pool of gasoline. For NO reason.


There were reasons, they just weren't good ones


I have no idea how we came to a situation where something that was designed as a trade union can now repeatedly try to restrict my freedoms.


And we only have to win once to reverse it.


It's not going to get reversed once they're able to analyze all comms automatically for wrong think and stop 'extremist groups' because something 'Nazi'. The Stati letter steamers could only dream of such a system.


Most TV tubes aren't too valuable. Now if your TV was made by telefunken, that might be a different story


I do prefer tubes that have the funk.


Instead of re-engineering complicated systems to be resilient to thieves, what if we just got rid of the thieves?


That's an even more complicated system. How would we catch them without the type of surveillance or anti-fencing measures that have even more downsides than the amount of theft they eliminate?


A quantitative look which might interest you:

https://davidrozado.substack.com/p/is-wikipedia-politically-...


> Results show a mild to moderate tendency in Wikipedia articles to associate public figures ideologically aligned right-of-center with more negative sentiment than public figures ideologically aligned left-of-center

It could be that politicians right of center have a tendency to do things which merit negative sentiment slightly more often than politicians left of center. It begs the question to call this bias.


The article address this very criticism


Seems misleading or at the very least incomplete to blame these fees on "the power of the free market" when the visa / mastercard duopoly exists due to regulations making the entry barrier to creating a new card network essentially infinite


Anyone is free to use discover and it works for most merchants in the USA.

American Express leverages the fact that most consumers don’t care what the merchant is charged


I don't think it's due to regulations. It's just a natural monopoly due to network effects. Any new entrant has to convince hundreds of payment processors and retailers to accept their cards before anyone even has them. Regulations are a trivial barrier compared to that.


I think that was parent’s point. That the US does not have as free a market.


> EU & UK cap it

suggests that was not the GP's point.


Taking bets?


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

Search: