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

Leetcode problem


Studies on rats have shown significant similarities between sugar consumption and drug-like effects, including bingeing, craving, tolerance, withdrawal, dependence, and reward. Some researchers argue that sugar alters mood and induces pleasure in a way that mimics drug effects such as cocaine. In certain experiments, rats even preferred sugar over cocaine, reinforcing the idea that sugar can strongly activate the brain’s reward system


This is somewhat intuitive when you think that sugar is almost pure energy and in a food-scarce existence that we evolved for, energy is synonymous with survival. So alongside reproducing, consuming energy is probably one of the most basic of desires we are hardwired to seek out in more ways than one


Why does skyfall.dev block Nigeria?


>At that point, a shared ledger implemented with traditional databases / protocols would be faster, easier, and more transparent.

This is missing the fundamental idea behind blockchain. You need a consensus mechanism and immutable ledger in order for it to be secure and truly transparent. Once you add those boom you have yourself another blockchain :-)

>So what are stablecoins really trying to do? Circumvent regulation?

No, stablecoins have less regulatory burden because of the public ledger removing the need for manual review and verification by various intermediaries. They are still compliant with regulation.


> You need a consensus mechanism and immutable ledger in order for it to be secure and truly transparent

Consensus between who? The stablecoin issuer, stripe in this case, is a single party, who are they coordinating with that requires a consensus algorithm?


How does centralized SQL replication do consensus, compared to a DLT?

Blockchain consensuses: Which is the next block, Which protocol version must what quorum upgrade to before a soft fork locks in, Whether a stake should be slashed, Leader/supernode election (handled by the UNL text file in git in rippled, which underpins R3, W3C Web Monetization micropayments, and W3C ILP Interledger protocol (which FedNow implements)),

When there are counterparties and then they might as well just off-site replicate the whole database or blockchain locally, and run indexes and queries at their expense.

And then there is a network of counterparties willing to grant liquidity to cover exchanges that cover multiple assets and chains, who want to limit their exposure by limiting the credit they extend to any one party in the network and account for an entire auditable transaction. (Interledger ILP Peering, Clearing, and Settlement)

Private blockchain or SQL replication scaling woes? And then implement mandatory keys in an append-only application.

This or something like Trillian?

From "PSA: SQLite WAL checksums fail silently and may lose data" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44672902 :

> google/trillian adds Merkle hashes to table rows.

> sqlite-parquet-vtable would workaround broken WAL checksums.

> [...] [cr-sqlite implements CRDT, which is one of a number of newer ways to handle consensus in SQL database replication ]

> (How) Should merkle hashes be added to sqlite for consistency? How would merkle hashes in sqlite differ from WAL checksums?


I suspect this was downvoted in ignorance.

Do you understand how consensus matters with distributed databases and DLTs?

Do you understand the difference between WAL checksums and Merkle hashes?

If the WAL checksums are not sufficient, is the SQL database sufficient? Why are Merkle hashes not "bolted on" but native to blockchains?

How many integrity hashes should be bolted onto a SQL database for there to be replication with data integrity?


GPT-5 is a text only model. ChatGPT uses 4o for images still


The naming is very confusing. I thought the underlying model was gpt image 1 in the api but transparently shown as part of the same chat model in the UI?


The idea is that AGI will be able to self improve at an exponential rate. This is where the idea of take off comes from. That self improvement part isn’t happening today.


Genius transition plan


How is the security risk propaganda?


If your security model means me having access to my own hardware is a security risk you're malicious and your security model is bad.


It's not (only) propaganda. Rooting disables or bypasses verified boot, allowing exploits to persist across a reboot.


Malware van persist across reboots regardless of verified boot. What it can't do is persist through a factory reset.

But if you really want a thorough reset, simply re-lock the bootloader and flash stock firmware from there. Nothing can persist through that without an exploit in the verification chain and if you have that kind of exploit, you don't need the bootloader to be unlocked in the first place.

Also, there are devices out there that let you enroll your own keys, like the Google Pixel series.


> Malware [c]an persist across reboots regardless of verified boot.

Some can, some can't. Even when it can persist, escalating to root after every reboot may be unreliable or noisy (e.g. 70% chance of success, 30% crash) compared to straight persistence as root without verified boot.

> Also, there are devices out there that let you enroll your own keys, like the Google Pixel series.

This still applies to those devices. It's the main reason GrapheneOS (which exclusively runs on Pixels, with the bootloader relocked to a GrapheneOS key) is opposed to building in root access: Verified boot would be "enabled", but effectively bypassed. https://xcancel.com/GrapheneOS/status/1730435135714050560


It's the hardware vendor's "think of the children".


LLMs are like power tools. You still need to understand the architecture, do the right measurements, and apply the right screw to the right spot.


Calm down it’s a 1 person company. The entitlement is over the top


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

Search: