MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by rollcat | 2025-04-01 14:38:28+00:00
Let's start with: there is no such thing as "Linux" man pages. There's <https://docs.kernel.org> but that only concerns the kernel itself.

How does a particular distribution handle its man pages is up to that distribution. You can browse what is generally considered to be the "standard" set of man pages online: <https://man7.org/linux/man-pages/> or <https://linux.die.net/man/>, but this is a third-party community effort. I've often found minor discrepancies between those resources and what I actually found installed on my system.

Debian does an absolutely amazing job: every executable in every package has to come with a man page, and if there isn't one, the maintainers will at least write a synopsis. You can also read these man pages online: <https://manpages.debian.org>; you get to browse by release, section, you even get translations. Some derivatives (e.g. Ubuntu) will provide their own online browser as well.

But this is where things start to get dicey. Most distributions make heavy use of GNU coreutils, glibc, GCC, etc. Some of these (like GCC) are complex, because the problem domain is complex. On the other hand, coreutils' level of unnecessary complexity is almost byzantine; to cope with that, the GNU project mostly abandoned man pages (these mostly just contain a synopsis) in favour of an in-house "info" system <https://www.gnu.org/software/texinfo/manual/info-stnd/info-s...>, which is basically TeX <https://tug.org> with layers on top.

But not all distros use GNU tools nowadays; e.g. Alpine (actually pretty popular, thanks to the Docker ecosystem) uses busybox and musl libc. However for some reason Alpine not only does not provide an online man page browser, but requires installing a meta-package to add the man pages to your system. The differences between GNU and busybox+musl are non-trivial (and not unlike GNU vs BSD).

You can blame the Linux ecosystem fragmentation, and you would be correct to point out there are three popular BSDs, each with its own goals and little quirks. My final point is about the quality of the documentation. Compare coreutils chmod(1) <https://linux.die.net/man/1/chmod> and OpenBSD chmod(1) <https://man.openbsd.org/chmod.1>. The former is a brief, dense, and intimidating wall of text that expects you to immediately grasp what "ugoa" or "rwxXst" stand for; you will only find out that the tool manages file access permissions once you dig through the third paragraph; the text concludes by referring you to "info coreutils aqchmod invocationaq". By contrast, OpenBSD's man page has a clear introduction, then paces you through explaining the basic; goes into detail over the octal and symbolic representations (with pretty tables); warns you about a common mistake; has several examples with explanations (including equivalences between octal and symbolic forms); and concludes by referring you to the POSIX standards.

Best of it, you can expect the same high standard of quality throughout the entire base system, from user commands to device drivers and kernel internals.
by Dylanfm | 2025-04-01 14:38:57+00:00
It sounds like there have been some changes to the Guardian and Observer lately, such as the sale of the Observer to Tortoise Media. [0] Journalists were concerned enough to strike. [1]

[0] https://broligarchy.substack.com/p/who-is-the-money-behind-t... [1] (PDF) https://www.nuj.org.uk/asset/18CD4D84-FD26-4CDB-AF43E11F6A6C...
by m000 | 2025-04-01 14:39:13+00:00
My personal addition to an otherwise great article.

Remember that you make your contribution because you or your company get something out of it. Don't expect any enthusiasm or kudos from the project's side. If these come, consider them a bonus. The contribution process will be slow. If you need the changes you are proposing, you will have to live with a fork or workarounds in your code for a while.

Explain all the above to your company. Expect them to be completely clueless on how open source works, even if they are developers themselves.

Personal anecdote on this: I had a team lead who insisted we directly submit a patch because "people would be thankful that we fix their code". And actually expected that they would have merged our fix before the end of our sprint.
by nopurpose | 2025-04-01 14:41:07+00:00
What do you mean? Pool content can't be GCed , because there are references to it: pool itself.

What people do is what this article suggested, pool.Get/pool.Put, which makes it only grow in size even if load profile changes. App literally accumulated now unwanted garbage in pool and no app I have seen made and attempt to GC it.
by baxtr | 2025-04-01 14:41:35+00:00
There is a really interesting book called Alchemy by Rory Sutherland.

In one chapter he describes his frustration with GPS based navigation apps. I thought it was similar to what you describe.

> If I am commuting home, I may prefer a slower route that avoids traffic jams. (Humans, unlike GPS devices, would rather keep moving slowly than get stuck in stop-start traffic.) GPS devices also have no notion of trade-offs, in particular relating to optimising ‘average, expected journey time’ and minimising ‘variance’ – the difference between the best and the worst journey time for a given route.

For instance, whenever I drive to the airport, I often ignore my GPS. This is because what I need when I’m catching a flight is not the fastest average journey, but the one with the lowest variance in journey time – the one with the ‘least-bad worst-case scenario’. The satnav always recommends that I travel there by motorway, whereas I mostly use the back roads.
by ouilala | 2025-04-01 14:41:46+00:00
And that's how we see the USA devolve into a third world shithole. In a proper system the cops should serve and fear the populace. In third world shiteholes, people fear the cops. I should be asking the government why you need any data at all from me? They need to give me a good reason to invade my privacy and I should be able to say fuck off if the reason is not sufficient. In fact I should be able to ask the cop for his id, for him to unlock his phone for him to give away his passwords, for me to strip search him.
by gruez | 2025-04-01 14:42:08+00:00
>The problem is the accident distribution is really skewed, with a small fraction of drivers contributing most accidents.

Even if you take this at face value:

1. such "dangerous" drivers still screw over "safe", by crashing into them. Unless you're willing to take them off the road entirely, you can't invoke "the majority drives better than average" and call it a day. At least in the US, doing this is a non-starter.

2. Driverless systems aren't slightly safer than the average driver, they're significantly safer. For instance waymo claims "81% fewer injury-causing crashes". This effect alone might swamp out the "majority drive a lot better than average" phenomena you talk about. Most drivers might be safer than average, but are they 5x safer than average?
by npongratz | 2025-04-01 14:42:10+00:00
> From grade school on, you are graded on whether or not the grading authority likes the results you got.

I took an exam in a high school science class where I answered a question with the textbook's definition exactly as presented in the textbook, complete with the page number the definition was found on. I knew a bit about the topic, so I then cited outside scientific sources that explained why the definition was incomplete. There wasn't enough room to complete my answer in the space provided, so I spiraled it out into the margins of the exam paper.

My teacher marked my answer wrong. Then crossed that out and marked it correct. Then crossed that out, and finally marked it wrong again. During parent-teacher conferences, the science teacher admitted that even though I answered the question with the exactly correct definition, my further exposition made him "mad" (his word), and because he was angry, he marked it wrong.
by WesolyKubeczek | 2025-04-01 14:42:39+00:00
An AI agent will likely be worse in that you would have to actively haggle with it so it doesn’t upsell you by default, which IMO is harder than circumnavigating the dark patterns.

An actually useful agent is something that is totally doable with technologies even from a decade ago, which you by necessity need to host yourself, with a sizeable amount of DIY and duct tape, since it won’t be allowed to exist as a hosted product. The purveyor of goods and services cannot bargain with it so it puts useless junk into your shopping cart on impulse. You cannot really upsell it, all the ad impressions are lost on it, and you cannot phish it with ad buttons that look like the UI of your site — it goes in with the sole purpose to make your bookings/arrangements, it’s a quick in-and-out. It, by its very definition and design, is very adversarial to how most companies with Internet presences run things.
by albedoa | 2025-04-01 14:43:10+00:00
Let's try this a different way: What would it take for you to retract your misleading comparisons?

You keep acknowledging and then repeating the deceit. You even solicit ways to stop being deceitful only to reject the many suggestions.

> Happy to tweak the framing if it’s coming off wrong.

It's coming off wrong (because it is wrong). So go ahead, your move.
by TheJoeMan | 2025-04-01 14:43:37+00:00
Do you drink a lot of caffeine? A family member had this occasionally with no family history of issues, and the cardiologist had them wear a portable EKG for a few days that synced with an Android phone, with not much results. Finally the family member cut down from 4 espresso shots a day to just 1 cup of brewed, and the issue hasn't returned.
by pizlonator | 2025-04-01 14:43:39+00:00
This is false.

Lots of pauseless concurrent GCs have shipped for other languages. SGCL is not special in that regard. Worse, SGCL hasn’t been shown to actually avoid disruptions to program execution while the shipping concurrent GCs for Java and other languages have been shown to really avoid disruptions.

(I say disruptions, not pauses, because avoiding “pauses” where the GC “stops” your threads is only the first step. Once you tackle that you have to fix cases of the GC forcing the program to take bursts of slow paths on pointer access and allocation.)

SGCL is a toy by comparison to other concurrent GCs. For example is has hilariously complex pointer access costs that serious concurrent GCs avoid.
by porridgeraisin | 2025-04-01 14:43:44+00:00
The nature of each failure matters as much as the frequency of failure. The way in which accidents humans get into occur is vastly different from the way in which self driving car accidents occur, even if the end result is pixel for pixel same. Blame, compensation, "peace of mind" of the involved are all affected by this, so it matters a lot.

The solution to this is self driving cars reaching critical mass through some other means[1]. Because then it will become the new normal before anyone realises it.

Personally, I think taxis are going to be the thing that takes them to critical mass regardless of all safety considerations. The driving force behind this will be the fact that in some countries humans driving taxis will soon be economically infeasible, at the prices people can afford. Then, if you agree that Uber et.al are far too entrenched in society for people to just forget about it, you can imagine waymo, robotaxi, etc, picking up.

[1] the "true" solution is to train it to get into the kind of accidents humans get in to, and try to "shape its uncertainty", but this is hard and of course infeasible with real world experiments. Recently, simulations have become extraordinarily better (due to generative models) for robotic/self driving tasks, so there is a slim chance this might change.
by ouilala | 2025-04-01 14:44:00+00:00
Nothing wrong with it. In fact I should be able to see the papers of the ICE agent, to unlock his phone, to strip search him and detain him if necessary until I find he isn't a terrorist; and if found to be a threat, neutralize him by whatever means necessary. Why not, whats good for the goose is good for the gander. I don't believe in special rights for certain groups. If he can search me, I can search him too.
by zzrrt | 2025-04-01 14:44:02+00:00
This was covered in the original article. There was no real evidence, he was not convicted of anything, and the court ultimately gave him protection from being returned to El Salvador.

Those are the facts that should have been weighed in a deportation trial, which the government skipped and now say they can’t get him back from his foreign jailer. If Trump’s government can do this to him, they can do it to anyone in the US.
by timeon | 2025-04-01 14:44:14+00:00
> I do believe the whole concept of beyond A reasonable doubt was based upon the belief that it is better for 10 guilty men to go free than for one innocent man to suffer.

Societies that do believe in this do not have capital punishment. It seems to me from the outside that US have different priorities. Like with school-shootings - apparently that is worth it there.
by Etheryte | 2025-04-01 14:44:33+00:00
Frankly that's a good reason to never give Nue serious consideration. It's all fine when you're building small apps one view at a time. When you have an application with hundreds of views and you need to refactor, that's when you need the types, otherwise you'll never see the tail end of oh we missed that this needed to be renamed there too.
by kkukshtel | 2025-04-01 14:44:45+00:00
Modern C# collection expressions make the definition of names closer to F#:

string[] names = ["Peter", "Julia", "Xi"];

I know working on "natural type" of collections is something the C# team is working on, so it feels possible in the future that you'll be able to do this:

var names = ["Peter", "Julia", "Xi"];

Which I think would then allow:

["Peter", "Julia", "Xi"].Select(name => $"Hello, {name}").ToList().ForEach(greeting => Console.WriteLine($"{greeting}! Enjoy your C#"));
by PhunkyPhil | 2025-04-01 14:44:47+00:00
I simply don't agree that an IBR loan is a good enough deal to not justify one needing useful and employable skills coming out of higher education.

The utility of a degree, from what I've seen, _does_ end up being better than the accrued debt on average, but the distribution of these cases (I simply imagine) leaves enough people on the margin to be harmful.
by vonmoltke | 2025-04-01 14:45:00+00:00
> Also I assume radar-proof is just because it's a ground effect vehicle that will never fly high enough to show up on radar it certainly doesn't look all angular like a stealth bomber. In which case my bicycle is also radar-proof?

From the way the article is worded, it does seem the author is only considering air search radar with this claim. Without low observability features, this will show up on surface search and surveillance radars. There might be an initial period where some radars fail to register it because they reject it as a possible target due to its kinematics. If craft like this become common, though, the signal processing algorithms will be updated to handle them. Most can already deal with very low-flying helicopters anyway.

That said, just because it isn't angular doesn't mean it doesn't have low observability features. Radar absorbing material would still make it harder to detect. So would more subtle elements of the physical design. I don't think "radar-proof" in that section header is justified, though.
by ty6853 | 2025-04-01 14:45:06+00:00
>No, my case is predicated on it being bad to share information about an upcoming military operation with the Editor in Chief of The Atlantic and that doing so is the result is of a series of objectively illegal and incompetent actions.

We are in 99% agreement depending on framing. By my or your standard what they did was bad and incompetent. I'm judging by the standards for which they are selected -- burning budget to keep the right people paid. At that they are quite competent and agilely shift from Ukraine to further incursion in the ME. In this endeavor, bad opsec is competence as evacuating the target creates further opportunity for operations. The odd drone getting shot down would even be desirable from this view.

>Your gripes about the military-industrial complex are irrelevant.

They are relevant because they help you understand the criteria of competence and understand the one for which they were selected. You or I hypothetically may be better at opsec but we would be incompetent since we would not diligently work to achieve my gripes.
by shortrounddev2 | 2025-04-01 14:45:32+00:00
Well also if you're using Visual Studio it will generate solution files as well, not just fsproj. I grew up doing C/C++ so boilerplate project/IDE/make files as well as build objects are something I expect to see. I think people who work in primarily JIT'd/interpreted languages are used to just having a directory tree full of source files and having some CLI tool manage everything for them. Maybe a dependency list file as well, but that's about it. Python is like this, and javascript CAN be like this
by cmrdporcupine | 2025-04-01 14:45:36+00:00
Isn't the "goodness" of CUDA really down to its mass adoption -- and therefore its community and network effects -- not strictly its technical attributes?

If I recall, there are various "GPU programming" and "AI" efforts that have existed for AMD GPUs, but none of them have had the same success in large part because they're simply non-"standard?"
by yjftsjthsd-h | 2025-04-01 14:45:40+00:00
I don't think those first two are violated? I'm pretty sure you can make /usr read-only, mount it from a shared source, and nuke /usr/local at will. I do agree that splitting config files by base and not-base means there are two places, but given this particular system design it seems like a bad assumption rather than a bad design.
by philjohn | 2025-04-01 14:46:01+00:00
There are numerous ways of avoiding inheritance tax, and therefore not having to deal with business property relief.

If the business is going to be a going concern for many years, then proper estate planning should be part of any careful running of a business. Passing it on 7 years before death is the most obvious play; yes, actuarially there will be some people who die before the 7 years have passed, so doing it early is important if continuity of the business is important.
by oxidant | 2025-04-01 14:46:04+00:00
Spreading arrays and objects is such a common performance hit. It works fine for small instances but falls over in large instances.

Here's the JS CRM engine https://github.com/nuejs/nue/blob/master/packages/examples/s...

I see a number of issues, but don't have time to look into them.

1. Spreading when you probably don't need a copy: sortEntries. Sorting is probably where the overflow happens. Just sort in place or use Array.from or slice.

2. Excessive use of array functions. In my experience, a C style for loop performs better when you need performance. Create an empty array before, perform your business logic inside the block, and push to the array.

3. I don't know how filter is called, but it potentially loops through all of the events three times in the worst case.

4. paginate manually creates a JSON string from the returned entries. I don't know why, it seems inefficient.
by icegreentea2 | 2025-04-01 14:46:47+00:00
The company press release states "The second phase of work will examine seaglider capabilities across missions including contested logistics and medevac/casevac".

I agree that this would be useful for medevac/casevac, but I'm less sure about the search part of SAR. 180 miles is not a lot of range for searching.

I still believe this is primarily about contested logistics, because the USMC still hasn't solved that issue. One of the stand in force concept's biggest weakness right now is how will the marines go about sustaining the force. There's a lot of good ideas written down, but concretely they still don't have good solutions.

I think it's fairly clear that the Marines will look to unnamed undersea vehicles as one vector, but I think they're looking for flexibility and redundancy (and certainly the speed that these guys offer would be interesting).

What's written about SIFs is that the Marines anticipate the majority of SIFs to be deployed in the crisis building phase. They do not envision on day one of a shooting war, somehow dispersing all of their forces across the first island chain - they take for granted that they will somehow do that in the build up. After that, then ya, maybe just med/casevac and resupply is what they're after.

I have a hard time finding concrete examples, but I always envisioned an example detachment being roughly platoon sized. Basically, imagine being able to man a NMESIS launcher or two, ISR, and a squad or two of infantry for security. I think at that point, these vehicles become more viable for certain types of sustainment. You could for example priority rush more NSMs to a detachment.
by qwertox | 2025-04-01 14:47:51+00:00
It's interesting that they noticed it right in the vicinity of the LHC, maybe this hints at some kind of leak?

The one in my garden always watches me through the window then I turn on the vacuum, so maybe it's feeling some kind of oddity with the electric motor. It's an old 3500 Watts one, which is now illegal to sell, and badly shielded.
by mikeyouse | 2025-04-01 14:48:12+00:00
> How long did it take it for the Osprey to make it into service?

I was curious so I went and looked;

1981 - Initial development contract awarded

1983 - Bell/Boeing submitted their prototype and since it was the only submission, they were awarded the contract

1985 - Osprey designation established, first full size prototypes under development

1988 - First Osprey was finished

1989 - First testing of the prototypes started and first flight in helicopter mode (several of the prototypes crashed)

1994 - Bell/Boeing received production contract for EMD phase

1997 - First EMD flight + more testing

2005 - Full rate production authorized

2007 - Marines began fielding them

They were still testing the various modes (carrier onboard deliveries, etc) into the 2020s but the most favorable case is that it took over 25 years from prototype to service.
by LinuxBender | 2025-04-01 14:48:24+00:00
I was referring to "all these years" as in happening all the time, not that it has never occurred. The US has always requested permission to enter the Mexican air space.

The CIA operated as a rogue organization for many decades and that has been curtailed in the last couple of decades. As a side note I am still of the opinion that is who actually created bitcoin and what replaced the drug money which I am in support of as there are less lives lost and they just get the desperate people. That should significantly reduce their dependency on South America as a source of income but now I am delving into whacky-ping-pong-ding-dong conspiracy theories.
by dylan604 | 2025-04-01 14:48:32+00:00
These are nothing like the Osprey. The Osprey is way more complex. If one of the engines goes out on the Osprey, there is linkage that will allow the remaining engine to continue to power both rotors. Nevermind the mission profiles are completely different.

How long did the SR-71 take to make it into service? How long did the F-22 or F-35 take? None of those answers have anything to do with the other.
by dagmx | 2025-04-01 14:48:46+00:00
A friend sent me their terms which state that they can retroactively revoke commercial use rights if you stop paying

> Important: Your commercial rights apply only while your subscription is active. If you downgrade to a plan that does not include commercial use or cancel your subscription, you lose the rights to use previously generated content for commercial purposes.

In all my years working in tech + design, I’ve never seen anyone actually try to force you into a perpetual subscription like this.