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

Why do you think Hal would have been Satoshi but then also been the first developer using his real name?


Perhaps he didn't really care to maintain the anonymity, but still wanted plausible deniability over the ownership of his fortune


A prank. Just think, a Japanese pseudonym that used british spelling. Hal loved a good prank. I also don't recall him being prideful in the way of ensuring he received credit for things.


Satoshi's email was hacked and that wasn't signed with PGP

I think the consensus is that the statement wasn't real


Satoshi never signed mailing list posts, forum posts, any private emails that we have access to or even the early Bitcoin code releases

I don't know how this became the burden to prove that writing is from Satoshi since none of the well-known Satoshi writing meets it


If that's the case why has Craig continued to gain prominence and have more and more sway over BTC? Bitcion SV is worth $4B now. He's been able to monopolize the mindshare on Satoshi and misdirect the narrative.


BSV is a small cryptocurrency, the market cap is smaller than the joke coin Dogecoin. $4B is less than half of a percent of the market cap of Bitcoin.

Furthermore, an investment in BSV isn't necessarily a validation of Craig Wright's claims.


It's the 23rd largest cryptocurrency. It's not especially small and you are comparing it to a crypto currently in the 14th spot, meme or not.


It was in the top 10 only a few months ago. The trend is that it's going away.


This is insane. Mess up with this and you could end up with a serious infection


You could end up with a brain infection, very easily.

If you cannot afford US dental care, and you are not super poor, get a 1 way ticket via Kiwi.com to a more “eastern” European Union country like Croatia or Poland. If you use scripts from GitHub or are very good at searching you can get such tickets for $200-$250. You can find extremely excellent dentists with great qualifications and reviews in countries like that, and many have amazing reviews and are super cheap.

A lot of people from EU countries, that do not have “socialized dental care” go to countries like that a couple times a year to get dental care.


This is totally bizarre to me.

> If you use scripts from GitHub or are very good at searching you can get such tickets for $200-$250.

This is the average cost, per tooth, of the work I had done here 2 years ago, in the US, at a dentist where I paid cash.

> You can find extremely excellent dentists with great qualifications and reviews in countries like that, and many have amazing reviews and are super cheap.

I’m wondering how cheap they have to be in order to make it cheaper to fly to europe. How much would be an extraction or a filling replacement?


Well, I am a dual US|EU citizen, currently living in Croatia. So, I do travel abroad a lot.

When I lived in the US, I had an individual plan through Costco (Delta Dental) that was quite a good deal. It was a Dental HMO plan, though. Really, the only thing I noticed that it did not cover was implants. However, Costco only offers it in a handful of states: https://www.costco.com/dental-insurance-services.html

Alternatively, you can get an individual dental plan through Delta Dental Plan in any state here: https://www1.deltadentalins.com/individuals.html

In both cases above, if you get the Dental HMO, it has no annual or lifetime maximum dollar limits, no waiting periods, or pre-existing condition clauses.

Anyways, I used my American dental insurance to get cleanings, X-Rays, and fillings. I go to Europe a couple times a year at minimum anyways, so I use that to my advantage by getting more advanced dental care there.

Dental implants, especially Swiss implants, can be 8 times cheaper than what some dentists charge in the US. A Swiss implant, when all said and done, costs about $1000 USD in the more eastern EU countries.

You may want to check out this website: https://www.whatclinic.com/dentists/worldwide

I would stick to European Union countries, as the quality of materials is very high. There is some website like the link I posted above, that has implant success rates posted, by dentist. I just do not remember the website's name. Anyways, you take your time and do extensive research before you choose your dentist.

Anyways, I have a very rare immune-mediated disease affecting my autonomic nervous system, which affects salivation, so my teeth are totally jacked up, even though they look really nice. I also have type 1 diabetes, and it makes my teeth naturally more prone to infections. So, cost-wise, I am screwed when it comes to dental care. I know somebody with the rare disease I have, that has about 20 implants in her mouth.

But, if your teeth are really jacked up, and especially if you need implants (of course it is better than dentures), it is way cheaper to go to European Union countries. This is even for 1 implant. If you may need thousands of dollars in dental care, you may be better off going to the European Union to get that care.


Thanks for your detailed reply and I’m sorry to hear of your medical conditions. Please continue to take good care of yourself.


Mess up cutting your toe nails or not disinfecting minor wounds and you can end up with a serious infection too.


Procedural generation for plants is actually pretty common already Most trees you see in video games are from middleware like Realtree


That's just one procedural generation algorithm.

Now suppose I want to take some fruit from the trees. And I want to slice and dice the different fruits. Peeling the skins when appropriate.

Or I want to plant a new tree. Or I want to remove it, with say, a lightsaber.

That's a couple generators more. Now add birds, dogs, insects, moss, moist surfaces, and so on. Hence, my point on needing several generators.


I mean, fine if you want to make an actual virtual world. But when it comes down to it, it's a video game. Why in the world would any of this be in COD or Battlefield or Fallout? It would take more time than making the actual game part of it to do this pointless garbage that nobody would care about and consume the majority of computer resources. Not to mention a lot of video games remove realistic aspects that would otherwise make it a chore to play.

There are lots of things to be improved in games, but what you're describing are improvements to a real life simulation.


And so you start to wonder, why you should buy a new version of COD, Battlefield or Fallout? Because it uses more energy and you need a new GPU then?


Even if Blender can't match any of these point solutions at their respective niches, I have to imagine there would be a ton of value in a team that all mostly works in a common tool they all know well a pipeline of Maya, C4D, Modo, Nuke, Houdini, Zbrush, etc strung together.

I'm just starting to learn Houdini, but with the OpenVDB support in Blender it seems like the most elegant workflow for someone without existing experience is run simulations in Houdini and then just export the volumetric data to Blender and work with it there.


They offer a Crytek derived game engine called Lumberyard used for the long-running Star Citizen scam


Not a valid comparison since those are core products of both companies. Google hasn't and never will open source Search.


Android is one of Google's core products, as well as web (including Chromium).


chromium is open source because webkit (khtml) was open source

many useful parts of android are closed, and open source versions of most apps are languishing (calendar, contacts, dialer etc)


Have you checked out F-Droid lately, and how does this compare to Apple or Microsoft?


PUBG was itself a commercialized version of (arguably better) Arma 3 mods with a bunch of royalty free assets + microtransactions. It still was printing money and top of the Steam charts for many months- I think it ended up being a great outcome


Alphabet has 120K employees right now.

Ex-Google was a meaningful distinction 15 years ago. Today it does not remotely entitle you to being funded.

Many VCs today recognize that Google is an extremely bureaucratic place that does not resemble a startup and I know more than a few who view Google experience as a negative signal.


> Google is an extremely bureaucratic place

And that would be accurate, to a large extent. But it's also one of the few remaining _technically competent_ places that does not hire people who can't code.

That is why I qualified my statement by saying that the prospective founder would be _technically_ capable, not capable in general. If anything, they could be less organizationally capable, but that can be resolved with the right co-founder.

To put it into more concrete terms: say you had a million dollars and would want to allocate it towards a bet in order to potentially turn it into a lot more. Who would _you_ pick, someone with tech aptitude credentials (which a substantial stint at Google as an engineer all but guarantees), or someone with no discernible credentials?

Note that I'm not even mentioning race here. Race/gender/sexual orientation is 100% irrelevant in this calculation unless it actually confers an increased chance of turning $1M into $10M. E.g. as an investor I'd probably prefer a gay person to lead a gay dating service, just for the domain expertise. I'd still require that they have technical and/or business chops, however.


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

Search: