setra

If anyone wants to jump straight to the code: https://spatial-lang.org/hello-spatial/

TDLR: This is a content addressed data store similar to IPFS (although this project is older). You can configure one of several backends such as local file storage, S3, SSH, etc. It includes an organization system based on tags, and other meta data. You can construct a fuse filesystem representation based on a query. A web UI exists allowing exploration of existing files, uploading, etc.

A fatal accident at 50x the rate of a sober human driver with a study size where N = 1.

IPFS is not an automatically distributed file store. Just like torrents if someone wants to host a petabyte they can. That does not mean anyone else will be mirroring it.

This was written by a western venture capitalist Michael Moritz of Sequoia Capital. He Invested in Google, LinkedIn, PayPal. etc.

No, I am simply using shortened text not the USA PII legal concept. GDPR has many more restrictions than the USA concept of PII.

In this article the author states: "The latter definition is important for developers. It includes things like IP addresses, mobile device IDs, browser fingerprints, RFID tags, MAC addresses, cookies, telemetry, user account IDs, and any other form of system-generated data which identifies a natural person.". This information does NOT automatically qualify as personal data. Information being unique is not the same as personally identifiable. A random cookie sent by the browser is not PII. A cookie stored in conjunction with say an email address could be.

Certain information can be classified as PII if it possible to cross reference it with other stored information to identity a user. For example a European court in a recent ruling stated that a full IP address could be considered PII because an ISP would have a record of IP address and time with a persons name.

A unique random cookie is not PII automatically. It is only PII if it can be associated with something like a name (not limited to a name). Anonymous data with unique identities is not under the consent requirements of the GDPR.

The data collected is probably not fit to be classified as personal data. GDPR does not automatically forbid collection of anything involved with a user otherwise things like page popularity ranking would not be possible. There was a court ruling stating that IP addresses could be considered personal data because an ISP would have a log that associated the IP with a person. As long as the are only collecting things like "what packages are installed", "how powerful is the system", "when did it last update", and anonymize the last section of the IP they should be fine.

A computer can understand that an optimal solution is not always needed. There is nothing about the problem being NP complete that means the computer HAS to find the optimal solution.

To keep this in perspective bitcoin was under $1000 at the start of 2017. It is still a 700% increase since just that recent time.

When someone else runs the server you use, and your account is tied to their server, you are at the whims of the server owner, and are not able to migrate your identity.

These days programming languages actually are used for expressing proofs. They can automatically check them to. For example the Coq theorem proving language.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coq

Some would argue that writing code IS more fault proof than writing proofs the traditional way.

Bitcoin is deflationary with a cap on the number of units. If there is economic growth the value of each bitcoin will increase. Every current conventional currency introduces more monetary units as the economy grows.

HN said bitcoin was a bubble when it was at $10. HN said bitcoin was a bubble when it hit $500. HN said bitcoin was a bubble when it hit $4000. HN said bitcoin was a bubble when it hit $10,000.

The issue with knowing something is a bubble is that unless you know when the bubble is going to pop its nearly useless knowledge.

Bitcoin has demonstrated that the end of the bubble is NOT obvious and that there has been plenty of money to be made. My recommendation (what I did) is buy some amount of bitcoin in the off chance that its worth a million dollars in a few years. Because bitcoin is a deflationary system there is at least a good reason to think it will rise in value forever.

Considering this is DNS there has been a historical limit of 512 bytes. Despite this not usually being a limitation now you are really pushing the ideal packet size with hundreds of answers each of which are multiple bytes. High chance of packets being dropped.

They are primarily targeting the cloud database market. There are many examples of non free software surviving just fine in this market. Both amazon and google run their own proprietary cloud databases like this.

Look at the red dots it places down. Two of the dots are within 1/8th of a mile. All of the dots are within 4 miles. 1/8th of a mile resolution is extreme and not IP level.

How are they targeting location at such a high resolution? IP targeting is usually only accurate at the whole city level. In this they show tracking across a bus path. That would require GPS. What am I missing?

I can purchase a droplet on digital ocean than has gigabit and a terabyte of transfer every month for $5. A terabyte is more than enough content for me. I am sure most people could afford that to manage their interneting.

That sounds expensive to me for a server unless you are spending a massive amount on bandwidth or storage or something. A dedicated server on Hetzner costs around 50$ a month for 32 GB DDR4, gigabit with 30 terabytes a month (before throttle), and 4TB of drives.

https://www.hetzner.com/dedicated-rootserver/ex41

Further reading: https://www.51nb.com/benzhanshiye/2017-06-08/83668.html

This is correct from the unbound theoretical tape perspective. I should have expanded my point you are very correct. If you look in the context of physical realization (finite) a tape that can be written is some form of RAM. Beyond O(1) complexity all of these machines can express each other with different amounts of RAM. Even in the theoretical model an FSM can accept balanced parentheses of finite depth. My FSM point is basically wrong though.

That is gaming the definitions of "states" a bit. Your example has a official finite number of "states" combined with an unbounded tape of extra states while only counting the FSM controlling it. That tape is part of the state, the machine can edit / read the tape in its decision procedure.

Noting this a few more states than a handful are possible. For example my laptop with bitpacking could track the visited or not visited flag for 64000000000 states without even using disk. Tracking a 33 bit FSM.

I agree though that linear bounded Turing machines having a solution for the halting problem is not actually that useful for real computers considering by the time a few registers had been iterated over the sun would have exploded.

Your critique of hypercomputation applies all the same to Turing complete machines. A Turing machine can never be implemented and is a totally theoretical model. At best we can implement a class of machine below called a "Linear bounded Turing machine". For these machines the halting problem is solvable (it can just take a while). You could even implement a linear bounded Turing machine as an FSM it would just take an ungodly number of states.

This was actually written about in project plowshare (peaceful uses of nuclear weapons) and has significantly more info about it than this casual dismissal.

https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015077324005;vi...

First quote from a meta article: [

The initial idea involved weakening the storms and changing their trajectory — not necessarily destroying them. He theorized America could achieve this by detonating nukes in the air just outside the eye of the storm.

“It seems such a burst would, for at least 15 minutes, greatly influence the horizontals circulation of a hurricane … if a burst were made on one side of a storm or two bursts on opposite sides of a storm, considerable asymmetry in circulation could result,” ]

Second: [ According to Reed, the eye of a hurricane is about 10 degrees warmer than the rest of the storm. “It appears that a megaton explosion in the eye would engulf and entrain a large quantity of this hot ‘eye’ air and carry it out of the storm into the stratosphere.”

Thus heated, the nuked air at the center of the hurricane would rush upwards, pulling the hot air at the center of the storm with it. Then the colder air from the side walls of the hurricane would rush in to fill this gap and slow — or possibly even stop the hurricane. ]

His statement does not sound like a criticism of the police. It sounds like a criticism of her opinion of the police.

SlateStarCodex did an in depth cover of this issue at: http://slatestarcodex.com/2017/08/07/contra-grant-on-exagger...

Generally we discard 9/11 from such discussions as it blows death toll comparisons out the window. Going post 9/11 stays both relevant to current times and removes the absolute worst events in both cases (Ok city, and 9/11).

Doing comparisons without these cases we get similar numbers for both factions within some wide margin of error. Looking at this from a per capita perspective though we have Muslim Americans that make up around 1% of the population by my googling having a similar terrorism death toll as the 32% of the population that is right wing white Americans (white Americans being 64% of the population. This would make that faction 32 times more dangerous per capita than the white right wing.

I have only checked the first link however the NYT article from 2015 states

"48 have been killed by extremists who are not Muslim, including the recent mass killing in Charleston, S.C., compared with 26 by self-proclaimed jihadists, according to a count by New America, a Washington research center."

The pulse nightclub shooting alone killed 49 people. That is more than the entirety of the post 9/11 number white supremacist murders up to 2015 with a single event from 2016.