MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by kowabungalow | 2025-04-16 21:06:15+00:00
I think the problem is social tendency toward exaggeration and categorization. There are different social groups that have different but overlapping bell curves and whether it is nature or nurture is scientifically interesting, but dwelling on it all that much tends to get people hiring, marrying, grading, etc, based on the group instead of realizing a particular person will be somewhere on the curve and then kind of rewriting all of reality to fit the assumption that they really are nearer the average in their group than pesky reality keeps demonstrating.
by ww520 | 2025-04-16 21:06:21+00:00
This is very cool. Extremely fast lexical tokenizer is the basis for a fast compiler. Zig has good integration and support for SIMD operations that's perfect for this kind of things. It's definitely doable. I did a proof of concept on using SIMD to operate on 32-byte chunk to parse identifiers a while back.

https://github.com/williamw520/misc_zig/blob/main/identifier...
by runako | 2025-04-16 21:07:01+00:00
ERB is a server-side templating language. It's akin to PHP, Jinja for Python, JSP (Java), ASP.NET Web Pages, etc.

What these do is let you do things like turn a collection of objects into a the HTML for a table and send that over the wire. The client then just has time to display the table and not assemble it from e.g. JSON. ERB and similar allow you to build dynamic sites without using any Javascript at all.

To a first-order approximation, any dynamic site that does not use React or Angular will use a templating language like ERB.
by ahartman00 | 2025-04-16 21:07:33+00:00
"A somatic cell count (SCC) is a cell count of somatic cells in a fluid specimen, usually milk. In dairying, the SCC is an indicator of the quality of milk—specifically, its low likeliness to contain harmful bacteria, and thus its high food safety."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somatic_cell_count
by lxgr | 2025-04-16 21:07:37+00:00
> As long as you get the model weights without agreeing to the license

But is that how it works? Not implying that the situation is otherwise comparable, but you e.g. can't ignore the GPL that a copyrighted piece of code is made available to you under, just because "you didn't agree to it".

As I see it (as a non-lawyer), either model weights are copyrightable (then Meta's license would likely be enforceable), or they aren't, but then even "agreeing to the license" shouldn't be able to restrict what you can do with them.

In other words, I'd consider it a very strange outcome if Meta could sue licensees for breach of contract for their use of the weights, but not non-licensees, if the license itself only covers something that Meta doesn't even have exclusive rights to in the first place. (Then again, stranger decisions have been made around copyright.)
by ceejayoz | 2025-04-16 21:07:45+00:00
> If you lay a new line, you have to individually negotiate for easment rights with the owner of every single property your line crosses.

This may be true in some areas, but it wasn't in mine. I didn't have to agree to anything; it was negotiated with the town, not me. I presume they used the existing utility/sewer easements.
by mcbuilder | 2025-04-16 21:08:25+00:00
On the trip to my local recycling center I immediately did a double take when I saw a pair of Eizo GX540 monochrome medical diagnostic displays sitting there. I've got these babies hooked up and I can see myself using this e-ink mode and the grayscale nature of these monitors. Although these monitors weren't intended for productivity they are very good at editing B&W photography, terminal work, and even old films.
by avodonosov | 2025-04-16 21:08:28+00:00
First impression: with automation and short lived certificates, the Certifying Authorities become similar to Identity Providers / OpenID Provider in openid / openid-connect. The certificates are tokens.

And significant part of security is concentrated around the way Certifying Authorities validate the domain ownership. (So called challenges).

Next, maybe clients can run those challenges directly, instead of relying onto certificates? For example, when connecting a server, client client sends two unique values, and the server must create DNS record <unique-val-1>.server.com with record value of the <unique-val-2>. Client check that such record is created and thus the server has proven it controls the domain name.

Auth through DNS, that's what it is. We will just need to speed up the DNS system.
by philsnow | 2025-04-16 21:08:44+00:00
> As a certificate authority, one of the most common questions we hear from customers is whether they’ll be charged more to replace certificates more frequently. The answer is no. Cost is based on an annual subscription […]

(emphasis added)

Pump the brakes there, digicert. Price is based on an annual subscription. CA costs will actually go up an infinitesimal amount, but they’re already nearly zero to begin with. Running a CA has got to be one of the easiest rackets in the world.
by diggan | 2025-04-16 21:09:26+00:00
> Gemma3

Funnily enough, Gemma 3 also probably isn't "open source" if you have a previous understanding of what that is and means, they have their own "Gemma Terms of Use" which acts as the license. See https://ollama.com/library/gemma2/blobs/097a36493f71 for example.
by shaky-carrousel | 2025-04-16 21:09:35+00:00
I have to disagree. We've been using "knowing" for programs for decades without requiring it to imply reasoning. Just because the output now looks more realistic doesn't mean we need to suddenly get philosophical about it. That shift says more about us than about the software.

And while accurate mental models can help in certain contexts, they're not always necessary. I don't need a detailed model of how my OS handles file operations to use it effectively. A high-level understanding is usually enough. Insisting on deep internal accuracy in every case seems more like gatekeeping than good practice.
by const_cast | 2025-04-16 21:10:19+00:00
> You dont think there could be any logical reason why 77 million Americans voted for Trump?

No. Well there is, but not in the way you're thinking.

Far-right populist messaging works because the message is good and designed to cater to as many people as possible.

It plays into people's emotions and sense of identity. It calls upon a sense of national pride and creates an enemy within. It plays into the ego of MAGA cultists, proclaiming them to be the true Americans while those around them are lazy, on handouts, and don't deserve to be here.

> You don't think alot of contemporary Democrat beliefs could also be described as a religion that people blindly follow no matter how stupid or extreme?

Sure, some of it, yeah. There are, after all, populists in the democratic party.

But the democratic party is almost all right-leaning ultra-capitalists. There really are next to no extremists in the democratic party. The only reason you may believe otherwise is because of - you guessed it - far-right populist messaging. MAGA would like for you to believe that the democrats are baby eaters, pedophiles, and communists. Of course, it's just not true. Please see "enemy within" above, sense of national pride, appeal to emotion (harming children) etc etc.

> You say alot of words without much content.

No, I think what's happening is you don't understand what I'm saying or are choosing not to process it, and instead just kind of going "nuh uh!".

"nuh uh!" might have worked before the election. Now that MAGA is destroying the US from the inside out and posting Deportation ASMR while committing crimes against humanity, the "nuh uh" doesn't work. I'm sorry, you have no plausible deniability. You can continue to avoid accountability, but that doesn't change reality happening around you.
by EvanAnderson | 2025-04-16 21:10:32+00:00
I'm shocked at how "few" pages printing all 8x8 bitmaps would actually require. Assuming full page coverage of an 8.5 x 11 sheet at 600 dpi I'm only coming with a touch over 548 billion pages. I expected it to be more. Legal-size paper drops that to about 430.5 billion pages.
by alganet | 2025-04-16 21:10:39+00:00
Actual geniuses do not exist.

It's the product of a ritualized society. People select one person, bump that person up, then hit it like a piñata.

If you dress someone like a piñata, people will hit it for the candy inside. One of the ways of doing that is shaming the piñata, like comparing it to an asshole, or portraying it as a weak troubled loser, or sexualizing it.

The article proposes we don't hit piñatas anymore. I agree. Furthermore, we should not make human piñatas in the first place. Let the geniuses and celebrities and leaders fade to normality and cease to exist as a thing.

Of course this implies many of our societal systems are piñata-based. Hierarquies, celebrities, leaders and so on.

I agree that collaboration is a key aspect to solving this issue. It seems, however, that human collaboration is very hard where there are piñatas everywhere. It's hard when kids want to grow up to be piñatas.

I am sorry that many cultures have this ritual so heavily ingrained as part of their whole identites.
by tptacek | 2025-04-16 21:10:55+00:00
People who idealize this kind of solution should remember that by overloading core Internet infrastructure (which is what name resolution is) with a PKI, they're dooming any realistic mechanism that could revoke trust in the infrastructure operators. You can't "distrust" .com. But the browsers could distrust Verisign, because Verisign had competitors, and customers could switch transparently. Browser root programs also used this leverage to establish transparency logs (though: some hypothetical blockchain name thingy could give you that automatically, I guess; forget about it with the real DNS though).
by throwaway314155 | 2025-04-16 21:12:10+00:00
> one of them (Claude) told me that it can't tell because that might be discriminatory: "I apologize, but I do not feel comfortable providing recommendations about how to block specific search engines in a robots.txt file. That could be seen as attempting to circumvent or manipulate search engine policies, which goes against my principles."

How exactly does that response have anything to do with discrimination?
by mubou | 2025-04-16 21:12:12+00:00
Come on, this is clearly copy-pasted from chatgpt. You can plainly see where the headings and bullet points were. And it's just rehashing the benefits of markdown, anyway, which isn't relevant. Did you even bother to read this slop?

> Accept: text/markdown, most eCommerce sites will return HTML

Which means the site doesn't have markdown. So, add it? There are plenty of ways to tackle this, even if you can't modify the server code.

> Generating Markdown per-request via Accept headers is expensive

No one's saying the markdown can't be pre-rendered.

> Pre-rendered llms.txt files can be CDN-cached

Every CDN I've used has a way to vary by Accept. You can even have it redirect to a different url, or use a <link> tag that points to a markdown file. Which might even be called "llms.txt", who knows, who cares. That's the beauty of the existing standards: they're flexible.

Good god. I'm not going to debate against an AI, so don't bother generating a reply.
by Borealid | 2025-04-16 21:12:22+00:00
Your parent poster is quite clearly stating that they believe that model weights (ie, the model itself) cannot be copyrighted as it is not a creative work.

If the model weights cannot be copyrighted, you are not violating copyright law by duplicating them in the absence of a license grant, so you gain no benefit in entering into a contract by agreeing to the license.
Are Smartwatch Companies Agreeing on Features?
by xchip | 2025-04-16 21:12:23+00:00
It turns out that only high-end smartwatches come with the fall detection feature. A thing that can be a lifesaver for our aging parents.

How comes that cheap Smartwatches can detect activities like running, cycling, swimming... but cannot detect a parent falling?

Are smartwatch brands truly competing against each other, or just holding back features to push high-end sales?
by _bin_ | 2025-04-16 21:12:50+00:00
Allegations which musk denies. I have no idea if it’s true but the allegations revolve around work authorization not illegal immigration.

El Salvador’s prison is not a concentration camp. If you claim otherwise, prove it.

Judge only found probable cause and wanted more information. This is also not targeting Trump himself. Your statement is factually inaccurate.

You are in fact defending crime. If your position is “illegals are fine” we aren’t going to see eye-to-eye. I will continue to support sending every last one of them back.
by ceejayoz | 2025-04-16 21:13:11+00:00
> You and I know that it is provably, without-a-doubt, that he entered the US illegally and was remaining in the US illegally.

No one has charged him, let alone convicted him, of a crime for entering the country as a minor. He has no criminal record. That's a fact.

You and I know he received withholding of removal (and a work permit!). His remaining here at that point was legal, albeit potentially temporary.

The Supreme Court of the United States has ruled the deportation an illegal act. No portion of the judicial branch has yet weighed in on Garcia's actions.
by ivewonyoung | 2025-04-16 21:13:22+00:00
Not true. From the very second paragraph in bold on top from your own link:

> Update: on 9 September 2023, Walter Isaacson said his biography’s claim about Starlink and Crimea was based on “mistaken” information [see footnote]

The footnote:

> This article was amended on 14 September 2023 to add an update to the subheading. As the Guardian reported on 12 September 2023, following the publication of this article, Walter Isaacson retracted the claim in his biography of Elon Musk that the SpaceX CEO had secretly told engineers to switch off Starlink coverage of the Crimean coast.
by DrBazza | 2025-04-16 21:14:31+00:00
One cause of the UK's 'housing crisis' (or rather un-affordability), just like other countries I suppose, is simply that if I buy other properties, I get: capital appreciation on the asset, and return on investment (by renting it out).

Offer me a £500k passive investment that makes the same returns with the same guarantees, and I'll take that over a house.

Except they don't. No other investment comes close for the British middle classes with that sort of extra cash. And the UK government will tax you to the hilt on everything else.

Exacerbating the problem, is that you can get a bank loan for additional properties.
by Tijdreiziger | 2025-04-16 21:15:27+00:00
Most of those do in fact seem to use WordPress for part of their site:

* microsoft.com – uses WP at devblogs.microsoft.com

* digicert.com – may be a false positive, they link to files at /wp-content/ URLs, maybe they used WP in the past and kept the URLs?

* mozilla.org – uses WP at blog.mozilla.org

* nih.gov – uses WP at directorsblog.nih.gov

* forbes.com – can’t tell, my ad blocker breaks their cookie consent screen

* archive.org – uses WP at blog.archive.org

* nginx.org – uses WP at blog.nginx.org

* ebay.com – may be false positive?

We end up with 2/10 potential false positives, and one unknown (and even then, those are huge sites, who knows if they’ve got WP hiding under some deeply-buried subdomain).

I agree with you that Microsoft and TechCrunch probably aren’t FTPing their files in, but even if we assume that only 50% of WordPress sites are doing so, that’s still more websites than the next 10 competitors, combined!

If you think about it, this makes sense: do you reckon your local small businesses have a TechCrunch-level web presence, or are they using GoDaddy? Now consider that there exist many more local businesses than TechCrunches.
by speedgoose | 2025-04-16 21:16:17+00:00
I find the font very readable and somewhat unique.

I would have preferred a double-storey a instead of single-storey ɑ. I find it more readable and easier to distinguish against a o.

Though I can understand the need to be similar to handwriting. I'm guessing they had a long debate to decide between a and ɑ.
by const_cast | 2025-04-16 21:16:28+00:00
> Relative to any alternative that reduces congestion without charging fees, it doesn't.

These? Don't exist. We're not going to sit here and argue against hypothetical, made-up solutions.

> and the people being deterred are the most price sensitive ones, i.e. the poor.

Sigh. No, the most price sensitive people are riding the subway, because the subway is SIGNIFICANTLY cheaper and faster than owning and operating a car. This is targeting the people right above those people, who, because they have a bit more money, think they need to drive. They don't. They should be riding the subway. And now, they are. They might complain - but really, they're saving money.
by thaumasiotes | 2025-04-16 21:16:48+00:00
The letters "U", "V", and "W" are all derived from the same letter, the Latin "V". The sounds /u/, /v/, and /w/ are different.

We're talking about a period many centuries after Latin phonology might have been relevant. The word doesn't come from Latin. Old English has no confusion between [v] and [w] to begin with; [w] is part of the phoneme /w/ and [v] is part of the phoneme /f/. In Middle English there's a distinction between /f/ and /v/, where we see French-derived words like village and vine distinguished from English-derived words like fill and fire, and from French-derived words like fine.

So what happened?

> Same for latin ivvenis, modernized to juvenis, which gave young, jeune, jung, joven, etc.

Please don't just invent things that sound good to you. Young and (German, I assume) jung don't come from Latin either.

> U, v and w are all derived from the same letter v, for which no distinction existed in latin (same for i, j and y).

Again, please don't just make up random non-facts. Latin has no letter J. It does recognize Y, as the Greek letter upsilon, which it distinguishes from all Latin vowels. The fact that Romance languages name "Y" the "Greek I" should have been a hint of this. You can hardly read any Latin that mentions Greeks without running into it; compare Pyramus, Thucydides.
by _DeadFred_ | 2025-04-16 21:16:51+00:00
You've said he's "almost certainly committing <criminal> perjury". Based solely on the category of immigrant that he is. I think that is abhorrent, un-American, and violates the Constitution. In the USA 'all men' are created equal, and our rights apply to 'people' not just 'citizens' (a class that the current regime now wants to redefine to not include natural born Americans, forget slippery slope we're now on a water slide).

You keep trying to justify your claim with 'we need to categorize/make determinations on these groups because reasons' but not engaging with that you think we should categorize a class of immigrants as perjures simply because of the class they fit in' because to do otherwise makes immigration policies hard/able to be abused'. We used to believe as a nation in the theory we would rather that 10 criminals go free if it prevents one innocent person from going to prison. I get it's hard, and it has negative impacts to follow our Constitution and what our nation believes in. It's so hard that people have had to die to secure those things. It's so hard that my grandfathers faced crippling life long injuries fighting for their belief in it in WW2. My understanding it's hard doesn't mean I think we should just throw it away. Blanket 'xyz people are criminal liars' has no place in the United States of America. Systems that are aware of the incentive to lie, sure. But that is why we have courts and a rule of law, not labels on entire groups of people. That Democrats allowed abuse doesn't mean we give up on what America is. You can keep giving me bullet points but your basic premise is so flawed to me they don't matter.

Imagine you were talking about the Chinese in the U.S. in the 1800s. You’d have the same kinds of bullet points,claims about fraud, about them being impossible to integrate, claims it just too many people, about systems being overwhelmed. That’s how we got the Chinese Exclusion Act. A whole race of people labeled suspect by default, stripped of legal protections, barred from citizenship, and assumed to be lying just to get in. It was wrong then, and it’s just as wrong now. Policies built on fear and group guilt erode everything we claim to stand for. If we don’t push back against that, we’re not protecting our country we’re abandoning it.
by lxgr | 2025-04-16 21:17:54+00:00
Thinking about an absurd example to illustrate my point:

Imagine you find a printed copy of "Moby Dick". On the first page, you see the statement: "By reading this work, you are entering into a legally binding contract, obligating you to not spoil the ending to anybody under penalty of $100, payable as a charitable donation to NYPL."

Can whoever printed the (out of copyright) book sue you if you spoil the ending and don't make the donation? Would things change if you were to sign the first page with your name?
by realperspectde | 2025-04-16 21:18:06+00:00
America does not have to bring manufacturing back. It has to devote resources to robotics and AI to replace workers to make products for itself and it's people.

The transition period is currently already underway due to the tariffs. An unintented consequences is that the big players in commerce(Nike, All Big brand names...) no longer have a monopoly due to China relaxing the regulation on it's factories to disclose for which brands they manufacture products.

Now that the everyday person knows that they can also buy products from the same factories at a fraction of what they used to pay. They will do that. So the middleman will slowly fade out unless they can compete with... Robotics and AI.

The other consequences of the shift in this consumption dynamic is that it behaves in a downward fashion on inflation. People's incomes did not increase but they can now purchase more with their incomes. Jackets that used to be advertised as 200/300/400 dollars now can be bought for $20/$30 directly from the middlemen in China and get shipped to the US since they are under the $800 dollar limit.

This is actually a win win for all US residents. Enjoy it while it lasts.
by Nick-W | 2025-04-16 21:18:34+00:00
Bad. Our average cost to install service tends to be around $800-$1200, and that's not including overhead of setting up new towers/host sites. Our average cost to deliver service right now is about $80/mo, but the good news is that we're in a solid position to scale up to thousands of subscribers with minimal increase in overhead costs. We do it though because it makes a difference - plus I get random cookies & care packages from people, which is nice.