MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by StopDisinfo910 | 2025-04-15 14:17:58+00:00
> Yes. They are either in the legislative, executive, or judicial branch.

That’s not what independent means here.

Most independent agencies are part of the executive branch (some are part of the legislative and judiciary but they are the exception).

They are independent because congress gave the president limited power in their ability to dismiss the agency head and its members. These agencies have some regulatory authority which Congress has vested them on purpose.

You might argue under the unitary executive theory of law that these agencies are actually under the control of the president and the current Supreme Court (for what it’s worth) might even agree with you.

I might argue that it’s a complete travestissement of the constitution spirit and intent pushed forward by people who wish to dismantle the American republic and replace it by an authoritarian regime. But that’s on me.
by AStonesThrow | 2025-04-15 14:18:13+00:00
My mom exposed me and my sister to Python on PBS long ago, and we used to explode in paroxysms of laughter and roll around on the floor when the Dead Parrot sketch was going.

I rewatched it a few weeks ago, took note of the symbolism surrounding it, and now I am horrified, shocked, disgusted that I ever took delight in the abuse of women and degrading them. And I cannot watch Abby on NCIS without thinking of what the actress has been through in her real life.
by byungsoopark | 2025-04-15 14:18:15+00:00
Sure! Here's a very condensed overview:

The system uses two intersecting CW lasers in ionized gas to induce spatially-localized visible light emission through multiphoton transitions (non-resonant, no intermediate state). It's designed for open-air operation and uses energy focusing via PWM and low duty cycles to stay Class 1-safe while maintaining sufficient photon density. We're developing a working prototype with an industry partner, aiming for tabletop-to-large-scale modularity.

Happy to go into more technical details if you have specific questions.
by knowaveragejoe | 2025-04-15 14:18:28+00:00
> But a person used to be able to graduate high school and get a job that could support a house with a yard, a car, a non-working spouse and children.

> How do we get that level of prosperity back?

The issue is that this is a false premise. The house sucked. Only 1/3rd of American families had a single car at the time, and the cars sucked. We can go on and on about everything else. Not to mention the social environment at the time sucked.

That doesn't mean we shouldn't try to do something about the issues Americans face. But tariffs with a shifting set of sanewashed justifications are just Not It.
by 2OEH8eoCRo0 | 2025-04-15 14:18:48+00:00
It's difficult but necessary to bring manufacturing back due to defense logistical reasons.

We build about 100 SM-6 missiles a year. How long does this last against a peer? 12 hours?

I don't know if tariffs are the best way to do this but some manufacturing must come back one way or another.
by figassis | 2025-04-15 14:19:06+00:00
My problem is the number of steps and hoops to do something that used to be very fast. I feel like this is the opposite of what us engineers are supposed to offer our users. I get it is very secure, but I don't think this is a good compromise. Login should not be a chore. I should be minimally aware of it and still safe. That's my ideal experience.
by kjkjadksj | 2025-04-15 14:19:09+00:00
The state of the art is literally a half century beyond where american manufacturing was when it died. Anecdotally according to older family members who had those old manufacturing jobs, they were working at companies doing stuff like bending a steel rod at the end and then shipping it off to a sub contractor. This was not glamorous work. Most of them got into it because you don’t need to speak english to bend a pipe in a factory. And they did everything in their power to ensure the next generation would not have to work those sorts of jobs.
by _heimdall | 2025-04-15 14:19:30+00:00
Well you have to put context around what is being made more efficient.

Reducing headcount reduces labor costs and can be a form of financial efficiency. Reducing headcount also usually reduces the sheer number of people involved in any project, much like a small startup can move drastically quicker than a large, established org.

That said, there goal here doesn't seem to be clear as to what is being made efficient and they definitely aren't reducing the budget or size of government (outside of literal headcount, most people complain instead of red tape and regulations).
by InkCanon | 2025-04-15 14:19:33+00:00
The free market (which I think people also include in capitalism) would correctly predict labour intensive jobs would be outsourced. This is very much a feature (comparative advantage), not a bug. I realized a lot of supposedly free market people don't even know the basics of it. Politically the free market has become an identity associated with national greatness and a sense of control of ones destiny. The dominant feeling seems to be if you have a free market, you will win everything (which is actually opposite from the truth).
by sebastian_z | 2025-04-15 14:19:42+00:00
There can be big differences in radiation doses depending on the type of CT scanner used. Some radiology practices advertise low-dosage scanners [1]. So, if you need a CT scan you can ask for the dosage and find a practice that has a low-dosage scanner.

[1] See, e.g., https://zwangerpesiri.com/services/ct/ (no affiliation; just an example).
by asdajksah2123 | 2025-04-15 14:19:42+00:00
> There are plenty of people saying these tariffs will not work.

Work to do what?

> But a person used to be able to graduate high school and get a job that could support a house with a yard, a car, a non-working spouse and children.

Why do you think this has anything to do with tariffs or manufacturing?

> How do we get that level of prosperity back?

Better pay for the jobs people actually work. Reducing inequality by preventing the richest 0.1% from capturing all the massive gains in wealth the US has seen over the past few decades. Removing regulations that prevent the country from building housing and therefore driving up housing costs. Switching to a healthcare model in nearly any of the comparable developed countries almost all of which deliver better healthcare at half the cost. Not expecting everyone to be able to live a completely unsustainable suburban life. Having the government support children's upbringing by paying for high quality education, instituting rules and regulations that require mandatory paid maternity/paternity leave, etc.

Lost of poorer countries manage to do this and more just fine. The US is far richer than most of those countries.

Very little of this has to do with manufacturing jobs falling from 18mm to 13mm.
by mantas | 2025-04-15 14:19:42+00:00
Depends on how evaluate what is valuable. E.g. here in europe a lot of people think subsidising local agriculture is not valuable and we should just import cheaper food. On the other hand, a lot of people agree that food security is kinda valuable by itself. And want similar security in more fields. In that sense yes, doing „low tech“ is valuable in the long run.
by belorn | 2025-04-15 14:19:48+00:00
I am strongly reminded of my own governments (Sweden) attempts to introduce diversity programs into the school system, only to have each attempt ending in the court system that then finds the programs as discriminatory. In a few examples where they then went and tried to circumvent the anti-discriminatory laws, those attempts tend to favor the wrong demographic and get canceled shortly after. The very concept of favoring or hindering one demographic over an other in terms of grades or admissions are incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights, which is the basis for those laws. It is somewhat understandable why politicians tries to work around laws that protect human rights, but the rulings of the courts are not surprising in the least. For now it seems that most those initiatives has died off with fewer attempts to challenge the courts on this issue.

Strong fundamental laws such as the European Convention on Human Rights exist for a good reason. It prevents political winds from undermining the very pillars that society is built on. It also forces those that want to create exceptions to design their ideas in general form, which has some nice side effects of illuminating contradictions and false premises. If political demonstration on university grounds are disrupting education, then it doesn't matter what political message they are shouting. Either you allow it all, or none of it. If you want to give women higher admission credits in programs where they are a minority, you got to give men higher admission credits in programs where they are a minority. If the consequences of such general rules are not fitting the political winds then the default is return back to the foundation that is human rights.
by bitbasher | 2025-04-15 14:20:25+00:00
I don't think it's useless. Anyone that has been involved in any online communities that value privacy/anonymity have likely experienced a friend disappearing.

I distinctly remember reading a friend's writings and sending them a number of emails and not receiving a response. Only to find out months later they killed themself.

Processing all of that is kinda strange. Looking back at the emails, the timestamps, etc. I wish I had known sooner.
by tokioyoyo | 2025-04-15 14:20:26+00:00
Once again, want to point out how this is simply American leadership not wanting to accept their loss and move on. For the first time in the history they're not being perceived as the "global leader", and that's not acceptable from their POV. Now it's just freaking out and hoping that some extreme policy changes will change the course. From my personal experience, most people act this way when they're in distress and can't think ahead because of all the externalities.
Show HN: Insight Veda – Learn System Design and AI-Driven Architecture
by bhuvnesharya | 2025-04-15 14:20:39+00:00
Hi HN,

I'm excited to share Insight Veda, a learning platform I created to help developers and software engineers deeply understand System Design, Software Architecture, and AI-Driven Architecture.

What’s inside:

Architecture Lessons that break down key concepts in software and system design.

Real-World System Design Case Studies like how to design scalable chat systems.

AI-Driven System Design lessons that explore how to build AI-ready architectures and work with LLMs and AI agents.

This isn’t a course platform or bootcamp. It’s more of a curated knowledge base + learning journey for engineers who want to level up their architectural thinking.

Built with solo devs, team leads, and future architects in mind.

I’d love to hear your thoughts, feedback, or suggestions to improve it. Thank you!
by pclmulqdq | 2025-04-15 14:21:13+00:00
The problem with using this as an analogy is that the commas attach to the interjection "well," not to the words "rich" or "richer." Remove the "well" and you should remove all the punctuation around it.

"I'm getting fed up of making the rich... richer" might be grammatically ok in informal text, but a comma is definitely wrong.
by malfist | 2025-04-15 14:21:16+00:00
Typically, one doesn't jump from "senior in specialized field that you're experienced in" to "senior in specialized field you're not experienced in".

Like, you wouldn't expect someone who's an assistant manager at McDonald's to finish their law degree and start a new job as senior partner at the law firm.

You have to start over as a junior engineer. Because you are starting over
by tshaddox | 2025-04-15 14:21:28+00:00
Yeah, and it's not even necessarily a problem with the product itself. Sometimes I do want something cheap and disposable. The problem is that you have roughly zero information about the retailer, and manufacturer, and anyone in between. If one product listing gets bad reviews, someone can spin up 5 more listings with slightly different metadata. It's effectively a Sybil attack against the reputation system of the market.
by NoMoreNicksLeft | 2025-04-15 14:22:00+00:00
>The vast majority of humans have better things to do with their life than figure out how to secure their personal network.

One might hope this to be the case, but there are mountains of evidence to the contrary.

>I'm not saying they are too stupid to figure out how

Never fear. I'm here to say it so that you don't have to. Most are too stupid.
by vvern | 2025-04-15 14:22:00+00:00
My biggest issue with rust after two years is just as you highlight: the mod/crate divide is bad!

I want it to be easier to have more crates. The overhead of converting a module tree into a new crate is high. Modules get to have hierarchy, but crates end up being flat. Some of this is a direct result of the flat crate namespace.

A lot of the toil ends up coming from the need to muck with toml files and the fact that rust-analyzer can’t do it for me. I want to have refactoring tools to turn module trees into crates easily.

I feel like when I want to do that, I have to play this game of copying files then playing whack-a-mole until I get all the dependencies right. I wish dependencies were expressed in the code files themselves a la go. I think go did a really nice job with the packaging and dependency structure. It’s what I miss most.
by bluefirebrand | 2025-04-15 14:22:16+00:00
Yup, this happened at my midsize software company too

Meanwhile no one actually building software that I have been talking to is using these tools seriously for anything that they will admit to, anyways

More and more when I see people who are strongly pro-AI code and "vibe coding" I find they are either formerly devs that moved into management and don't write much code anymore, or people who have almost no dev experience at all and are absolutely not qualified to comment on the value of the code generation abilities of LLMs

When I talk to people whose job is majority about writing code, they aren't using AI tools much. Except the occasional junior dev who doesn't have much of a clue

These tools have some value, maybe. But it's nowhere near the hype would suggest
by mytailorisrich | 2025-04-15 14:22:17+00:00
The relations between Taiwan and the US have nothing to do with "democracy". First it was about anti-communism, when the Chinese government fled there and the mainland was taken over by the communists. Now it is about anti-communism and "China containment". The fact that Taiwan transitioned to democracy in the 1980s is just convenient to feed the public that this is indeed about "democracy", "freedom", the usual.

As a historical point, the US never had a problem with Taiwan being handed back to China at the end of WWII, since it is what happened. Again, this is all just a tool against the communists and then against China's increasing power as a whole.
by rollcat | 2025-04-15 14:22:33+00:00
I agree with your general sentiment.

When Github first showed up, I really liked it that (unlike on e.g. SourceForge) the username is right in the project's URL, it suggested that someone's accountable for the project. But there's no such thing as "accountability" when you're relying on unpaid volunteer work, made available for free to the general public - the "NO WARRANTY" is spelled in all caps, right there in the license.

So how do you know if you can trust the code you're running? You use your own judgement.
by rich_sasha | 2025-04-15 14:22:34+00:00
Frankly, I think the speed at which Trump is going might doom him, and thus save people like you.

I just don't think his pace of destruction is sustainable. He will soon, unavoidably, be faced with an angry mob. Not angry about freedom of speech or rule of law, probably, but inflation, recession and (lack of) leadership in crisis. He is brewing a cocktail of enormous discontent at a breakneck pace, and doesn't show the leadership or even interest to deal with it, never mind any external shock.

Communism in Poland fell, ultimately, over the price of meat.
by idle_zealot | 2025-04-15 14:22:41+00:00
> I'm surprised that the administration didn't understand this.

Why would you assume they don't understand? Every time they're questioned about the tariffs the narrative shifts. We have a trade deficit, we're getting ripped off, we want to bring back domestic manufacturing jobs, we'll automate them with robotics and AI, we're playing hardball to negotiate a better trade deal and get rid of fentanyl, it's a matter of national security, an economic emergency, the dollar is overvalued.

You cannot trust a word from them. If you want to understand why they're doing something you must look only at incentives and outcomes. My current analysis is that there's some internal conflict, but the overall push for tariffs comes from a desire to crash the economy and use the downturn to consolidate wealth and power.
by Shocka1 | 2025-04-15 14:22:43+00:00
Yeah this whole article is meant to stir outrage - HN is taking the bait, but that's expected. The most proficient people in the world at logic, and they are still culpable to biases. My comment shouldn't be confused though - there is smoke, but none of this is really proof because there isn't enough evidence yet from our perspective.

A lot more details needed: - Is it a fund or individual? - Does the trader make these kind of trades regularly?

I have more questions, but those are the first questions I would start with. I trade 0 and 1 days quite a bit in SPY and have collected a lot of data and performed statistical analysis on them for several years now. I myself sold S&P futures options that morning based off my data.

My theory until proven otherwise - Trader makes smaller trades in 0 days regularly - market volatility and the state of that week gave a much higher probability that there would be an extreme reversal at the first sign of any hint of good news, which was proven by fake news of a tariff lift just a day or two before. The overall bearish sentiment also coiled the market for an extreme move to the upside. Adding even more probability, the market that day was at the same level from Monday, where it showed buyers were foaming at the mouth to buy. Trump tweets just after market open that it was a great time to buy. Probability increases even more...

Similar to a very high probability count in Blackjack, trader puts in a trade at 12 and has an exit plan for 1 or two hours later. Trader determines that worst case 50 to 75% of the trade is lost due to theta decay by 2pm. Maybe they have a stop at 40%? Best case 2 to 10x's their money due to support levels giving a small rally. They've done this before and the wins outweigh the losses. Maybe even a hedge fund or algo trader running an ML model.

In my data I've seen extremely large multi-million dollar call option plays regularly when there is market volatility like this. Until proven otherwise, everyone just needs to stop with the outrage. I'm completely willing to change my mind as more evidence comes out.
by meltyness | 2025-04-15 14:23:02+00:00
Gripes about the borrow checker I think would be cured with the following surprising fact, and interesting "problem solving" approach to the language's design:

In Rust there's at least 5 types of everything, in order of strength:

- Value / unqualified / "owned"

- Generically, T - Optionally mutable

- Mutable Reference

- &mut T - you can only have one of these for a given value

- Reference / Shared reference

- &T - you can have arbitrarily many for a given value

- Raw constant pointer

- *const T - you can have arbitrarily many, and they're not liveness checked

- Raw mutable pointer

- *mut T - you can have arbitrarily many, and they're not liveness checked

Now I say at least because things get appreciably more complicated when you find yourself dealing with lifetimes which apply to "References", those are indeed themselves types, but ultimately represent a compiler-executed calculus regarding liveness relative to some Value.

They also can 'fan out' like a multiple-dereference pointer, but the tricky part is how the APIs for Types conform to these, for example;

Since there are 3 different types of things in a collection, then there are 3 different ways to iterate over them `iter()`, `iter_mut()`, `into_iter()` in increasing order of strength. Most of the breadth or early complexity arises from the urge to treat these as a distraction, rather than a fundamental aspect of systems code.

Crates / modules are a bit of a meme: https://www.reddit.com/r/rust/comments/ujry0b/media_how_to_c...

Bevy has done some work investigating build performance: https://bevyengine.org/learn/quick-start/getting-started/set...
by wl | 2025-04-15 14:23:27+00:00
It's a mistake to look at the creation narratives in the Bible and talk about inconsistencies and contradictions. There's an implicit assumption when you go down that route that we're discussing a single text. We don't do the same thing with, say, the ancient Egyptians, who had at least four distinct creation traditions. We only do this with the Biblical creation narratives because the redactors of Genesis started out with one creation narrative and then followed with another. (And let's not forget about the other creation traditions found in Psalm 104 and Job 38-42, which are quite different from those in Genesis!) But notably, the redactors didn't rationalize those distinct traditions into a single, consistent narrative. That's a later reading. If we try to venture into the minds of the redactors, they probably saw value in preserving these distinct traditions.
by ninetyninenine | 2025-04-15 14:23:31+00:00
First one looks like meta programming. IO. You are programming something else.

Toc programming seems trivial. I put a loop here instead of a map and my html parsing library does all the work. Parsing in general is usually handled by a library. Programmers don’t do much work here tbh. If you’re writing your own parser combinators.. well that’s rare.

Validation again that falls in the authentication and security layer. This lives in the 20 percent.

Word to pdf sounds is a legit use but also it lives in the 20 percent.

Financial computations also legit but it lives in the 20 percent. The more line items you have the more you have to either shift it to the database to compute or some number crunching async job. That’s IO and compute.

Chatbots are high IO.

Math solver works but honestly I went through my entire career only writing one of those for fun. Non standard but these are 20 percent.

> There's also the much more immediate counterpoint that it's of course possible to write web applications in Haskell (or OCaml, Scala, ...), otherwise all these frameworks wouldn't exist.

You’re talking about web frameworks right? The kind that lives on top of servers?

The modern day method of coding these servers is to be non blocking as much as possible. Meaning not much room to do functional calculations as the more calculations you do the more you block a thread. You are forwarding the tasks via IO to task runners or the database whether or not you use a framework from Haskell or scala or whatnot.

I still can’t really agree with you. Like writing code to convert a tree or word to pdf or parsing is just rare enough to live in the 20 percent. Most of the time you are writing code that writes query code.

Agree to disagree. We can end it here if you want.
by krapp | 2025-04-15 14:24:11+00:00
>Now, imagine if those people had gotten their way, and how much easier it would be for the administration to do some of the things people claim it wants to do (e.g. gulags).

Given that none of the people with firearms have done a damn thing to stop this and how many of them even voted for Trump and support his policies, because American gun and militia culture has been infested with Nazis since forever, I don't see how it could possibly have been any easier. There has been and continues to be no resistance to Trump of any significance. When he does open up the gulags for real, it's going to be America's armed patriot militias who round people up for the regime.