Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | epscylonb's comments login

I'd heard of JSON resume before, but it's interesting to hear the history and motivation.


This looks great. Only 40 lines, that's some amazing golf right there.


an included general purpose library with 40 lines of custom business logic? that software can't be very smart lol


This looks really, really good. Super fast as well. There's definitely space for a version of LinkedIn that's simpler to use and puts the resume front and center.


The network effect makes this unlikely.

You could ask what would happen if Cisco tried to force a new version of TCP/IP with unwelcome changes?

The comparison isn't quite the same yet, but it could be in the future and many bitcoin supporters think that's how it will turn out.


If you owe me 100 dollars you have a problem, if you owe me a million dollars I have problem.


Agreed, I think what a lot of people misunderstand is that bitcoin is a terribly inefficient way of achieving consensus. No one is going to build mining farms just to protect digital rights.

Bitcoin has a chance at becoming a currency because in the past it has been hard to reach a global consensus on value.

It may be possible to use a bitcoin based timestamping solution like https://github.com/goblin/chronobit to record the rights, but I can't see where the incentive is for everybody to support a distributed database of such rights.


As a huge Civ fan the idea of having a game take place on a truly spherical world is very appealing.


Libertarians are annoying, anyone who thinks technology will solve complex social problems will be dissapointed by bitcoin eventually.

The deflationary nature of bitcoin is it's hardest aspect to defend because there really hasn't been anything like it in history before. A finite asset that is easy to transfer over long distances without central interferance really is unprecedented.

I think you have bought in to the bitcoin fantasy that it will be the only currency in use. I don't think that will ever happen for a variety of reasons. If gold and fiat can coexist why not bitcoin too?. Loaning bitcoins seems to be a crazy proposition, so I suspect inflationary currencies will stick around just for that reason. Not to mention bitcoin by itself is fairly terrible for in person transactions, if you add a service on top what is the difference for the customer between that and a credit card company?. Fiat is useful and solves problems that bitcoin doesn't.

Regarding mining, I have my own concerns, bitcoin proponents love to describe mining as “securing the network” and equate it with vaults and security guards used in banks. This comparison is at least partly flawed, mining prevents double spends and nothing else. It's certainly true that a centralized ledger could prevent double spends for tiny fraction of the cost of mining, but globally who can be trusted by all parties to adminster it?. The comparison isn't one sided however, it is much cheaper to securely store (and move) bitcoins than gold for example.

Energy use is tricky, preserving the environment should be a top a priority, but should we aspire to use less energy?. One question I have often asked but never got a good answer to, how much of the worlds energy needs to be devoted to mining to prevent a 51% attack?. If it is north of 30% of the worlds energy output then right now that would seem a huge waste. But if we had access to cheaper, cleaner renewable energy, would it still be a problem?.

Malware?, it's just a symptom of larger problem, computer security is terrible. No one is really sure who to plame, users, applications, operating systems and hardware makers all come into the firing line. If bitcoin pushes forward computer security surely that can only be a good thing?.

I'm unconvinced about whether greshams law applies to mining due to the performance disparity between ASICs and CPU/GPUs, but surely if computer security improves this problem diminishes?.


Feel like I am replying to a obvious troll, but one thing that annoys me is when people blame the press for the leak.

Either the leak is justified or it's not. Either way the press is not responsible.

If the leak is not justified then the blame lies with the leaker and the organisation that the info was leaked from. If private companies poorly secure customer info they often get fined, but there seems to be no comeback when the leak involves a government.


I think the danger of the public nature of the blockchain is way overstated. It's fairly trivial to introduce reasonable doubt into your transaction history, blockchain analysis is nowhere near as useful to law enforcement as some people think.

The situation I worry about more is when someone is operating outside of the law, for example if you legitimately but unknowingly end up with some coins that were previously stolen, and then some guys with baseball bats turn up at your house.


That's why you split the coins repeatedly as you mix them. You don't want more than 0.1% of someone's "dirty" history. Client-side statistical analysis allows each node to decide which coins are good for them personally. (So that all coins are "far" away from each other.)


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

Search: