For the best experience on desktop, install the Chrome extension to track your reading on news.ycombinator.com
Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | history | helsinkiandrew's commentsregister

The "Why did my account get banned after verification?" section gives some reasons:

- Repeated violations of our Usage Policy

- Account creation from an unsupported location

- Terms of Service violations

- Under-18 usage


Those are reasons for banning after verification, not reasons for requesting identity verification in the first place.

Wouldn't the reasons for requesting identification be the same those for banning people - the system has flagged that you might be from the wrong location/under 18/creating multiple free acounts etc - so is validating.

They request ID for bans so that they can ban you personally. ID checks may as well be a sign that you've already been banned and they're fishing for ways to make the ban harder to evade. Venmo does the same thing.

> ID checks may as well be a sign that you've already been banned and they're fishing for ways to make the ban harder to evade.

So identity verification is basically a canary that your account is about to get banned, or is on the chopping block. At that point you're better off abandoning ship rather than handing over your ID.


Basically exactly my point. If you could use the service without ID verification, and others can still use the service without ID verification, but you've been blocked because you haven't handed over your ID, then leave or start a new account. That is if you're averse to being banned personally. If you don't mind the risk then you can verify ID and prepare to jump ship if it's a ban.

Maybe Anthropic just likes creating a market for dark identities. Because that's the most likely effect of such stupidity; generating more ID theft victims with no change to services to criminals.

Is a "dark identity" one that's never been shared with an identity-theft-as-a-service? Or is it just of one that's (supposed to be) privacy-conscious (and wouldn't otherwise have been an easy victim)?


> Blend it with any dry ingredients like sugar before using.

That's the key.

I'm not an expert - and have only experience making/mixing liquids for cocktails - but Gum Arabic (often used to add a thicker mouthfeel in sugar syrups) isn't a great emulsifier but needs to be full homogenised with the oils before adding to more liquid - exceptionally high speed, aggressive blending for longer than it looks like is needed, to create tiny droplets which the gum arabic then stabilises, or the oil will end up separating after a few hours/days.

Sucros Esters, Propylene Glycol, or Polysorbate 80 (which I haven't used) probably do a better job but only Sucros Esters could be considered 'natural'


> but that it can take up to 10 days to stop receiving emails when you unsubscribe

This is a really bad business practice, people will just mark your mail as spam and the likelyhood of other people seeing your mails will drop


I still do not understand how marketers haven't understood that quality > quantity.

But often $ generated by quantity > $ generated by quality. And that’s the metric everyone really cares about.

Because a lot of the time, it isn't.

Inside the marketing org bubble, quantity is the "any moron could see that" metric. So anyone who wants to get ahead, inside that bubble, had better be willing to optimize it.

They understand.

They also understand that they have little or no quality that most people actualy want and from their PoV quality > quantity > nothing.


From the github readme:

> I am no longer developing JSON Formatter as an open source project. I'm moving to a closed-source, commercial model in order to build a more comprehensive API-browsing tool with premium features.


> When miners can't cover costs, they sell bitcoin to fund operations

Surely they should stop producing until its profitable again, or am I missing something?


If everyone stopped mining transactions couldn't go through anymore and the value of bitcoin would drop. If you're heavily invested in bitcoin that's bad. Also miners try to squeeze in their preferred transactions which they can't do when they're not mining. Finally the costs dont drop to zero when you turn the miners off, so the loss from mining might be less than the loss when not mining.

He's not saying everyone, just the ones who are unprofitable. Not everyone mines bitcoin at the same cost. The ones who do have to stop can also profit from curtailment depending on the price of energy relative to hash profit.

Isn’t mining and transactions separate? Sure you need to have online participants, but they don’t have to actively mine, right?

You can generate transactions but ultimately transactions are validated and written in the blockchain by miners. Mining is essentially a way to select voters based on their ability to solve puzzles, ensuring that if you are selected once you have no particular advantage next time. Without miners this whole system doesn’t work.

No, mining is exactly what makes transactions go through, computing the next result in chain, certifying that the transaction happened.

What? That's not true. You don't need more than one CPU miner online for tx to go through. That's why there are difficulty adjustments.

But as number of miners drop arent btc at risk of a 50% attack?

But if you have anywhere near the market power to do a 50% attack, you can make a lot of money mining.

It's a very low effort article. There are several places where the cost of electricity is roughly zero and state actors have interest in Bitcoin (Iran/Russia) or strong actors more powerful than the state (Libya/Venezuela). It's not surprising that this is good news for them as mining rigs for Bitcoin are much lighter to transport than the ones for oil.

If you've already bought a miner, you will mine until the price of electricity exceeds the revenue from mining. If what's left over after paying for the electricity isn't enough to pay for the cost of the miners (and other already-committed fixed costs), you might make a loss, but still be incentivized to continue to at least recoup some of the loss.

When I was mining circa 2017 - 2021 (approx. 1 BTC/month and 25-30 ETH/month) and planning it all out, I prepared myself psychologically to operate for up to 2 years without any profits or selling. It was a hard pill to swallow and a huge risk; my costs were $8500/month in electrical and then another ~$2200 on a lease for the warehouse. When it dropped to $3,000/BTC a few months after I came online and stayed there for 6-8 months, I started wondering if I was the biggest dumbass in my county.

Thankfully, it all worked out in the end very well. I don't know how anyone would put in the effort/money to get a major crypto farm going and plan to just cash out every month to pay bills. What's the point? I always thought of it as a long-term bet on the price going way up, which it did.


Seems like you could have made that same bet by just buying BTC with that money and doing twice as good.

Up to a point; once it was over $12k or so, it was cheaper to mine them than to buy them. But yeah, I guess in retrospect I could have just dumped ~$450k into buying BTC when it was at $3,000 and made 3x what I ended up making, but there were other considerations for why I did it at the time. The mining was co-located with my cannabis grow/operations, and in many ways the mining was started secondary to that, even though the mining ended up being a little more profitable over the life of the facility

> The [bitcoin] mining was co-located with my cannabis grow/operations

HN quote of the day!


So its true what they were saying about bitcoin. It is used by criminals.

I dunno, probably only if you don't count for human psychology. If they bought N BTC and tried to held them, would they still hold them when they double in value? What about increasing 10-fold?

Compared to doing some work to getting 1 BTC per month, which you can then individually decide what to do with, instead of a lump sum you could cash out at any moment.


This was my great failure with Bitcoin. Bought in at $100, had many coins at $400. Sold most of it by $3000. Hard to not cash out when your investment goes 30x. In hindsight… ugghhh.

I mined in 2014 with free electricity and that was true even then. That's with hindsight though, the mining reward is more predictable than that market price would increase (more than) equivalently.

If you bought a bunch of hardware to mine bitcoins, then not using that hardware represents a 100% loss of value. You may lose money producing, but you would lose even more money not producing.

You're not missing anything. As you can see if you read through the thread, they rely on bitcoin miners being heavily invested into bitcoin and bitcoin equipment, so those people will operate unprofitably to prop up their holdings. It's a moron's economy. A system that relies on externalities and corruption, and produces nothing of value. It's the art market with no art.

If bitcoin miners are smart enough to have anticipated this, and decided not to hold onto bitcoin and just let it drop; and also to have repurposed their equipment, sold it to bigger fools, or have just run it into the ground, none of these ideas make any sense.

Why would they, though? The real answer is that governments and monopolists are propping up bitcoin through simply handing tax money to bitcoin holders, and in the case of the latter (also government tit-suckers) leveraging themselves to pump up bitcoin markets when they are down. I'm sick of humoring this because it was once mildly interesting technically. It's a criminal scheme and everyone involved needs to go to prison. When I hear a politician say the word bitcoin, I'm going to do everything in my power to damage that politician.


I need to buy a service. The service is provided in the US, where it is a grey area service. The service provider is not trustworthy enough to give it my credit card, and it doesn't accept neither paypal nor stripe. Unsurprisingly, it accepts bitcoins.

The way bitcoin exists, the provider accepts bitcoin; it doesn't accept other crypto. I would rather bitcoin, or something equivalent to exist than not.

There is also the case of people who hold value in bitcoin because it is more stable than their banks; go figure. This was the case in Argentina and Venezuela. That was also a gray area, but I think it would morally acceptable to do that even if it was prohibited


What did folks in Argentina and Venezuela do before Bitcoin? Perhaps that's even better?

Decades ago, in my country it was illegal to hold dollar bills. Naturally, you couldn't have dollar bank accounts. What was done back then was to illegally keep bills inside bags, hidden, and pray god they weren't found because you would go to prison.

The alternative is not holding money yourself. Buy everything as soon as you can, and hoard physical goods, which is cumbersome, dangerous and inefficient. Bitcoin is an upgrade in all senses.


If Bitcoin were similarly illegal, would it still be an upgrade?

Yes. It will always be better than holding illegal bills.

I am talking about normal people who want to take money out of the country. if you own a shop you will know how to surf the hostile environment; they probably already have contacts.


You're missing that humans are often irrational.

They may be hoping it goes back up.


China also benefits that demonstrated its influence (by persuading Iran to negotiate) and from its supply of cheap Iranian oil:

https://x.com/shanaka86/status/2041682779948380317


There’s a saying in Finland that foreign "saunas" are not true saunas at all, but rather just "untypically warm rooms".

The experiments where at 73°C which is a lot hotter than most gym/hotel/spa saunas I’ve been in outside Finland


As an Estonian, anything below 80°C is considered a "kids sauna". 80°C - 90°C is a cold-but-workable sauna and proper sauna starts from 90+°C. I'd assume it's the same in Finland as we share a lot of the sauna culture.

This would be same in Germany and eastern european countries too. But it really depend on humidity. High humidity saunas don't have to be hot and get tough pretty quicky. 100c dry sauna is lot more manageable than 60c humid sauna (atleast to me).

Indeed, humidity matters a lot. Most our saunas here are löyly (in Finnish) saunas, so you get a rollercoaster of dry - humid - dry cycles. Once you get to 100+c and throw a good amount of water on the stones, it can get quite challenging to endure :)

Everybody has their personal preference of course. For me, the sweet spot seems to be a moderately humid sauna at 93c. At that point, the löyly is not too harsh yet but is still hot enough to make you feel alive :)


I also prefer around 90-100c with swings of humidity. I think it's most exciting exactly because you can make it temporarily more intensive with the "humid wave".

It's the most popular type of sauna - "the sauna" for a reason.


My steam room (at home) at 116F/47C is close to the upper limit of bearable for me. But that's a lot more humidity than even a humid sauna.

90+ sauna sounds painful. Are you actually throwing water? Because even with 80 the steam is pretty hot

Whether sauna is hot or not depends on whether you enjoy the cold water plunge afterwards :)

The typical preset on dry saunas in Bay Area is ~165 F (73 C). Which is cold. Waste of time and money :). Usually, by closing or pouring cold water on sensor, one can make it to 180-190 F (82-87 C) - this is where you start to feel like you are in sauna, though it takes prolong time to heat you up enough to enjoy the cold plunge. If you're lucky enough, you can get to 200, 210, 220 F (104 C) - this is where you start to feel relaxed like as if the heat is working inside you.

>Are you actually throwing water? Because even with 80 the steam is pretty hot

Of course those numbers would be impossible to enjoy in steam sauna. The only steam sauna that had a wall thermometer that i've visited in recent years was showing 55 C when it already felt pretty well and hot.

Note - steam sauna and "throwing water" are 2 different things. The steam sauna is a machine generating a lot of steam, so the room is close to 100% humidity.

The "throwing water" is like Russian "banya" - it is in-between of dry and steam, though frequently is more close to dry Finnish sauna - wooden walls, stove, etc. where in addition to the heated air, you'd throw a water on the heater/stones thus adding a hit of hot steam to that air (in some "banya" configurations if you happen to be close to and in the immediate path of that steam you can sometimes get light burns).


Just a clarification as it may not be clear from your message. A Finnish ("dry") sauna always includes throwing water on the stove, which is called "löyly".

People have different preferences for the warmth of the sauna -- as low as 65°C for some elderly folks, all the way up to 120°C for more hardcore people -- but water is always thrown on the stove. You won't get burns, but it can have a real sting. It's enjoyable, but may feel uncomfortable as a new experience.


When a swimhall has two saunas, a "hot" and a "hotter", I'd guess they are at about 70°C and 90°C.

70-90 seems reasonable, 90 is already over my comfort which is around 80, but the post talked about >90 degrees which just seems stupidly hot

I don't know anyone who wants sauna that hot - steam is involved. Numbers over 90 sound like dry heat only. My 0,02€.

Since when has Finnish sauna been dry? As a Finn I have never been in a dry sauna. We always throw water on the stones.

Also while 73°C is a proper sauna, there are plenty of hotter ones. 90°C is closer to what I'm used to at my apartment building's common sauna. I do take two breaks when I'm there for 30 mims though.

What percent humidity? That is just as important as temperature for understanding how tolerable a particular sauna is.

It's a sauna so humidity depends on how much water I feel like throwing on the stones ("kiuas"). I throw at about once per minute, but I have no idea what that would mean in humidity.

73° hot?

Here in mainland Europe, a "classic fin sauna" is usually at least 90°++


Would those be "dry saunas" or proper ones where you're allowed to throw water on the rocks? Adding humidity ('löyly') is kinda the point, and 73°C might be just fine for a small sauna, giving you a nice punchy löyly.

> hrow water on the rocks?

Depends on the location! Very often, at public locations there is a "saua master" taking care, in smaller locations I have seen people handling this on their own.

And in one location there was a sign: "no private watering due to electrical issues"


I think I've heard US it's mostly no water at all on stove and Germany I've heard they have had these sauna-masters who come and cast water on stove.

Neither of these are practised anywhere in Finland at least. But there are at least one Finnish swimming bath where they had to limit steam competitions and made a button controlled mechanism to administer water instead of free usage. Not because electrical shock prevention but because bad human behaviour per se.


The men's sauna at Harjutori in Helsinki has a pullchain (with a handle of wood, natch), by the entrance to the room. When you walk into the men's sauna (which is BIG), you can inquire whether löyly is needed, and affirmative answers dictate a tug or two or three on the chain, which releases bursts of steam.

And anyone on the highest bench really gets cooked.


Yes every sauna I have ever been to in Europe (spas, various gyms) have electric heater with stones on top. Infra saunas are only for cheapest installs at home and usually dont generate enough heat.

Also, 80° celzius minimum for proper saunas, I have been to >100 celzius ones and its a struggle to remain for 15 mins inside.

Another point - I consider the after-part most crucial for health benefits to me - as-cold-as-possible long shower or even better a similar dip pool. Few days after that my cold resistance is significantly higher. Just the heating of body in sauna I can reach also ie with cardio workout or free weights, which brings tons of other benefits.


That "electric heater stones on top" is usually called stove, "kiuas" in Finnish :)

When needing to define type of stove, it's electric stove, wood heated stove. Latter has two types, which continuous wood burning is still common (this stove you can add burning wood during bathing) and older not so much any more used before bathing heated type stove which you cannot add wood while bathing. Oldest type is smoke-sauna, which doesn't have chimney at all. Wood is burnt in stove when heating, then when burnt enough sauna is ventilated first and then bathing starts.

But all these different heating elements are commonly stoves, just adding electric-, wood-, or smoke- stove is added context requiring.

Infra saunas then have those lamps of course, no stove there.


This is one of the primary reasons I use a sauna; the cardiovascular benefits. I hate doing cardio exercises at the gym or elsewhere.

Alas, Finns are not particularly healthy in the cardiovascular department. I don't believe there are any major benefits.

It's much improved tho. A campaign started years ago to wean the general population off the addiction to dairy products.

Anything beyond 90 C is not a sauna :) Better to have 90+ and hot steam as in Russian sauna (banya) :)

you can sous vide beef and pork at a lower temperature than that

I knew a guy that would bring a steak sealed in a vac seal bag to the gym and leave it in the sauna while he worked out. One hour later he was done working out and it was ready to eat too. Not sure I can actually recommend it to others but the novelty was interesting till they nearly kicked him out of the gym.

On a recent visit to Finland I found out that basically all supermarkets sell aluminium foil bags for the purpose of cooking sausages on the sauna stove while you use the sauna.

Sounds a bit like using your dishwasher to cook your dinner - https://parallelplates.com/dishwashers-still-full-meals/

I won’t want to use my dishwasher as a sauna though /s


I think you intended to link a different article. That one’s not about cooking with your dishwasher.

85% of Wordpress users are businesses with less than 50 employees [1], in most cases it will be one person who is uploading and managing content and fighting with the config they don’t really understand. There’s a huge number of businesses filling a real need of making simpler versions of products (whether Wordpress, mailchimp, shopping). AI is just the latest version of that

[1] https://enlyft.com/tech/products/wordpress


There’s a tweet by Radigan Carter from a few weeks ago that has a great historical perspective - If you’re not interested on the possible financial outcomes skip to the “How This Started” section.

https://x.com/radigancarter/status/2035073252134129757?s=46

>In Shia theology, standing against injustice is obligatory especiallywhen you cannot win in conventional terms. Defeat and death are not failure, capitulating in the face of overwhelming injustice is the failure.


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

Search:

HN For You