A close read of the position paper that proposed treating relational databases as graphs.

The Trinity Monolith is Live. Founding 100 ingress is active. Witness the Marrow. Join the Resonance.

This is an automated check to get rid of most bots. If you have JavaScript enabled, it should redirect to the real page soon. If you don't, it still should redirect soon, but you can click here if you're fast.

Discover invented words for complex emotions in The Dictionary of Obscure Sorrows—a poetic lens on the human condition and the hidden depths of feeling.

The discovery of an unsecured Chinese policing dashboard shows how authorities track people of interest.

And just like that—surprise!—one AI company bails out another AI company's grift. Google agreeing to rent compute from xAI (cough, "SpaceX") magically makes them eligible for inclusion in the S&P500. Americans, they are looting your life savings, the ones you earned through labour that they are gleefully replacing. Your descendants will never have the chance you had. https://techcrunch.com/2026/06/05/google-will-pay-spacex-920m-per-month-for-compute/

While a few people complain that AI is "stealing Open Source", training on Open Source code and giving nothing in return, I'm currently living the complete opposite: we are in

Hi everyone, I’m an amateur student who has been experimenting with neural networks mostly out of curiosity. Over the past few weeks, I ended up going fairly deep into a specific architecture I designed, which I call a Directional Neural Network (DirNN). This isn’t meant as a polished or formal contribution — it’s something I’ve been tinkering with, iterating on, and testing in my spare time. That said, the architecture does impose real structural constraints and uses a custom backward pass. In my own experiments on simple tasks (including some using GloVe embeddings), the DirNN has repeatedly performed better than standard MLP baselines. This result has been consistent enough that I don’t think it’s pure luck — but I’m very aware that I might be fooling myself. What I’m unsure about is whether I’ve been unfair in my comparisons. I don’t know if: the DirNN is effectively a special or degenerate case of an MLP my training procedure, initialization, or optimizer choices favor it in subtle ways the tasks or datasets I’m using make the comparison misleading I’ve put together a small repository with a README describing the architecture, the custom backward pass, and a minimal script to reproduce what I’m seeing. I’m posting here because I could really use a sanity check from people more experienced than me. If this is obviously flawed, I’d much rather learn that now. Blunt technical criticism, references, or “you’re missing X” comments are all very welcome. Repository: DirNNs Thanks for reading — I’m genuinely here to learn. submitted by /u/jos_lucas73 [link] [Kommentare]

I know this is going to ruffle some feathers, but the more you look at the actual mechanics of crypto, the harder it is to deny. Stripped of all the blockchain jargon and laser-eyes hype, Bitcoin behaves exactly like a global, hyper-financialized meme token. The big difference between BTC and Doge or Pepe is that Bitcoin’s meme is wrapped in a fancy suit and called a "Store of Value." Think about it: A meme is just a shared cultural idea that gains power because a critical mass of people agree to repeat it. Bitcoin has no intrinsic value. It doesn't generate cash flows like a business, it doesn't pay dividends, and it has almost zero real world utility as an actual currency because of its volatility and transaction limits. Its entire valuation relies purely on the Greater Fool Theory. You buy a few satoshis today at a premium, not because you want to spend it, but solely because you are betting that a "greater fool" will come along tomorrow and pay you even more for it. Whenever you point this out, die hard fans immediately pivot to inflation. "But the dollar is losing purchasing power! Bitcoin goes up when inflation hits!" Sure, it does. But crypto bros act like Bitcoin is the only asset that reacts to inflation. Newsflash: Inflation lifts all asset markets. When money is devalued, the price of real estate, commodities, and corporate stocks go up too. Except there's a massive difference. When you buy into the stock market to hedge against inflation, you are buying a piece of a business that can raise its prices, grow its revenues, and produce profits. Profitable companies have a theoretical mathematical floor based on how well that business is doing. Bitcoin has no such floor. If inflation hits, it only goes up if enough people think it will, not because it’s suddenly producing more goods or services. If you're looking for a legitimate store of value to beat inflation, wouldn't you rather own a piece of a company that actually produces something, rather than a digital casino chip? What happens when the supply of greater fools runs out, and the "inflation hedge" meme loses its viral grip on the public consciousness? Because there are no corporate earnings or physical assets to anchor its price, the sentiment will flip completely. When everyone tries to exit the burning theater at once, realizing there's no one left to sell to, it’s not hard to see a world where BTC bleeds all the way back down to $1,000, returning to a niche asset valued only by cryptographic hobbyists. Change my mind. Or if you agree, where do you think the actual floor is when the hype finally dies? submitted by /u/Good-Book-6912 [link] [Kommentare]

When people talk about this industry they usually say "crypto." When they invest in the traditional equities market they will usually tell you specifically which companies. The VAST majority of trading here is automated, and based off of BTC. I'm a firm believer that this market dump was caused (in addition to all of the typical external risk-related things) people becoming spooked about bitcoin. But since the market still behaves as a homogeneous lump, all projects dive automatically when investors (speculators) dive from bitcoin. The bitcoin narratives have evaporated one by one. No one uses it as a currency. It's not digital gold. Hard cap is not guaranteed. It's not unbreakable. It's not a hedge against inflation. It seems clear that, despite whatever tomorrow's new narrative, it doesn't have a lot of practical use. This community has known that, but the TV-viewing public is now realizing it. Meanwhile ETH has been attracting positive attention and development. The biggest criticisms so far (other than 'how has it changed my life day-to-day') have been that the price hasn't reflected the progress made. But the progress is undeniable. Projects ARE happening at some of the largest financial institutions in the world. We've yet to see whether these will bear fruit or not. However, the "projects" related to bitcoin were ETFs, and part of this dump might be related to the fact that the ETF fantasy has proven to mostly fall flat. All this to say, that I believe ETH is being traded automatically based on BTC price movement. Market is dumping bitcoin, therefore market-wide is dumping because of the automated trading. If you're a believer in the future of ETH, this is a pretty great moment to be buying. This would be a great moment to buy any asset that sees a dramatic drop in price because of something unrelated to its investment thesis. submitted by /u/Available_Win5204 [link] [Kommentare]

Article highlight. The conclusion frames Bitcoin as capable of serving many roles without belonging to one constituency. It can be money for individuals, capital for companies, collateral for banks, reserves for nations, property for families, infrastructure for markets, and *hope" for people facing economic misery. The preferred path treats the base layer as sacred infrastructure while pushing most innovation into higher layers, applications, custody systems, credit instruments, and capital markets. submitted by /u/zesushv [link] [Kommentare]