MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by babacklindo | 2025-04-12 01:28:24+00:00
Five years ago, I quit my job and moved to Canada. I thought I would figure things out fast. I didn’t.

I started working on startup ideas right away. I built a dev tool, then a fintech app, then something for immigration. I truly believed in each one, but none of them worked. No traction, no users, no funding.

After the third one failed, I gave up on building. I told myself it was time to be realistic and find a stable job.

So I applied. A lot.

But even that didn’t work. Dozens of applications. No interviews. No callbacks. Just silence.

That part hit the hardest. I wasn’t just failing at startups. I was failing at getting hired. It felt like I didn’t belong anywhere.

Then something small shifted. I came across a few indie makers on Twitter. People who were building simple tools on their own. No investors. No big launches. Just useful products and a slow, steady path.

That changed my mindset completely. For the first time, I realized I didn’t need permission to create something that works.

I called my co-founder. We decided to go all in on building as indie makers. No pitch decks. No outside money. Just focus on building something people would actually use.

That’s how we started lindo.ai. It’s a white-label AI website builder. People can use it to launch their own branded web design business, sell websites to clients, and earn money from day one.

We launched quietly at first, then did a Product Hunt launch. That’s when things started to grow fast.

Here is where we are now:

- 24,721 entrepreneurs, freelancers & web design agencies

- Over hald a million web pages created

- Hundreds of websites are being sold to clients every week

- Hundreds of 5-star reviews across platforms

- Used by people in more than 60 countries

- 70% of active users use lindo.ai to make recurring monthly income

- Still fully bootstrapped, no funding, no outside pressure

Today, I live with the love of my life. I get to work on something I care about. And most importantly, I get to support people who are building their own business through what we’ve created.

It took years of rejection and failure before something finally clicked. This story isn’t about going viral or getting lucky. It’s about staying in the game when nothing works.

If you’re in that place now, I’ve been there.

Happy to answer questions if anyone is curious about the journey, product, or anything else.
by OrvalWintermute | 2025-04-12 01:28:44+00:00
I highly doubt it was for that only.

To that end, I am quoting a portion of the text on the WH at the end of my comment here.

Anyone would be right to question CISA’s misallocation of resources to narrative control, and little emphasis on actual cyber security work. That CISA was getting in bed with former IC folks doing Censorship Ops, not computer security, is a very bad look.

There is a reason CISA is viewed as a joke with the federal space and it has everything to do with the lack of performance for a 2-3B dollar agency.

“ Christopher Krebs, the former head of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), is a significant bad-faith actor who weaponized and abused his Government authority. Krebs’ misconduct involved the censorship of disfavored speech implicating the 2020 election and COVID-19 pandemic. CISA, under Krebs’ leadership, suppressed conservative viewpoints under the guise of combatting supposed disinformation, and recruited and coerced major social media platforms to further its partisan mission. CISA covertly worked to blind the American public to the controversy surrounding Hunter Biden’s laptop. Krebs, through CISA, promoted the censorship of election information, including known risks associated with certain voting practices. Similarly, Krebs, through CISA, falsely and baselessly denied that the 2020 election was rigged and stolen, including by inappropriately and categorically dismissing widespread election malfeasance and serious vulnerabilities with voting machines. Krebs skewed the bona fide debate about COVID-19 by attempting to discredit widely shared views that ran contrary to CISA’s favored perspective.”
by toast0 | 2025-04-12 01:29:00+00:00
Like fidotron said, a process's internal state is lost if it crashes (or exits).

If you want that state to be durable, you need to store it durably. Mnesia provides (optional) distributed transactions which may be appropriate for durability needs (lots of details). Or you could externalize durability to other systems.

Erlang is wonderful, but it's not magic. It won't prevent hardware failures, so if an Erlang process fetches something from a queue and the cpu stops for whatever reason, you've got a tricky situation. Erlang does offer a way for a process to monitor other processes, including processes on remote nodes, so your process will be notified if the other process crashes or if the other node is disconnected; but if the other node is disconnected, you don't know what happened to the other process --- maybe it's still running and there's a connectivity issue, maybe the whole host OS crashed. You could perhaps set bidirectional monitors, and then know that the remote process would be notified of the disconnection as well, if it still was running... but you wouldn't know if the process finished (sucessfully or not) after the connectivity failed but before the failure was detected and processed.
by dang | 2025-04-12 01:29:13+00:00
Please don't post in the flamewar style to HN. Regardless of how right you are or feel you are, it's not what this site is for and destroys what it is for.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Edit: We've already had to ask you this more than once:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42742340 (Jan 2025)

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36577854 (July 2023)
by tpmoney | 2025-04-12 01:29:25+00:00
I had assumed when you said that a human retaining information was "unavoidable" and a machine retaining it was "avoidable" that the implication was we wouldn't tolerate humans retaining information if it was also "avoidable". Otherwise I'm unclear what the intent of distinguishing between "avoidable" and "unavoidable" was, and I'm unclear what it has to do with whether or not an AI model that was trained with "unlicensed" content is or isn't copyright infringing on its own.
by aleph_minus_one | 2025-04-12 01:30:09+00:00
> As software engineers we're used to quick iteration cycles in everything. It might not seem to you that they are "quick", but compared to the physical world they are.

That's also partly because (physical world) engineers don't invest the same intense effort to enable quick iteration cycles for their area as software engineers do. I cannot say whether this is a "culture problem" of engineering disciplines, or managers don't see a huge economic value that this would enable, and thus don't allow engineers to work on such topics.

I at least somewhat know what I am talking about, since when I had to get used to some CAD program, I really felt set back by decades in comparison what are standard practices in software development. A little bit like the difference between programming in a modern programming language and programming in Excel.

Thus, in some sense I am impressed by (e.g. mechanical) engineers who despite all this actually are capable to accomplish creating a product (and I do believe that if the practices improved, they could do so much more).
by defrost | 2025-04-12 01:30:30+00:00
It's a genuine question about the conditions under which error bar performance was claimed (by whomever you quoted).

> A bit LARPy, I would think.

That's all relative - I worked global exploration geophysics for a decade, worked with folk that developed sapphire oscillators for use in gravitational wave detection, dabble with SKA data, etc.

What's role play to some is just a job to others.
by wahern | 2025-04-12 01:31:19+00:00
> There was life before plastic - it used wood, glass, metal, and natural fabric.

Technically speaking, latex and even silk are plastics, as are traditional products made from plant oils, like linoleum. We've been relying on them for millennia.

"Plastics" has taken on a connotation similar to "GMO", intrinsically harmful by implication, in contrast to labels like "natural" or "organic" where the implication is they're harmless or healthy. But it's all just language games. There's often no meaningful distinction that can be made between "synthetic" products and "natural" products, and it's common for "natural" products to have safety profiles no less worrisome, if not more worrisome, then their synthetic counter parts. For example, "natural" neonicotinoid pesticides. There's alot more diversity in synthetic products, of course, though even the term "synthetic" relies on some very fuzzy line drawing.

The substantive aspects of the debate can be reduced to arguments over the pace of progress, risk, etc, which have little to with whether something is "natural" or "synthetic", "organic" or "plastic". These labels are mere rhetorical instruments.
by SideQuark | 2025-04-12 01:31:34+00:00
The middle and lower classes have more jobs now in the US, at higher wages, than ever. Your argument simply fails in light of evidence.

You can check this via BLS, or Census, or on FRED.

And those lower class Americans are higher paid than a huge part of the planet. US poverty level is at the 85th percentile in global income.
by __loam | 2025-04-12 01:31:55+00:00
Vacheron Constantin is one of the big 3 Swiss watch brands that also include Patek Phillipe and Audemars Piguet. These are a tier above Rolex and Omega and they specifically trade on scarceness and exclusivity. You haven't heard of them because they advertise in very specific places to watch nerds and the very wealthy. Each watch can be like $30,000 to $50,000, or even $120,000 for small run products with unique complications.

There's more interesting brands like Moritz Grossman and Bovet that make even rarer pieces but fewer people have heard of them.
by ack_complete | 2025-04-12 01:31:59+00:00
Even with native WDDM drivers it performed poorly in desktop graphics, because Vista also removed all GDI hardware acceleration support. This caused many 2D graphics operations to execute in software, or worse, an even slower mix of hardware and software rendering. Windows 7 improved on this by re-adding hardware acceleration for some GDI primitives and adding aperture windows to reduce DWM memory footprint.
by hosh | 2025-04-12 01:32:46+00:00
Starting with the most general: Nodejs suffers in the same way that other async systems do -- the lack of preemption means that certain async threads can starve other async threads. You can see this on GUI desktop apps when the GUI freezes because it wasn't written in a way to take that into account.

In other words, the runtime feature that Nodejs is the most proud of and markets to the world as its main advantage does not scale well in a reliable way.

The BEAM runtime has preemption and will degrade in performance much more gracefully. In most situations, because of preemption (and hot code reloading) you still have a chance for attaching a REPL to the live runtime while under load. That allows someone to understand the live environment and maybe even hot patch the live code until a the real fix can run through the continuous delivery system.

I'm not going to go into the bad Javascript syntax bloopers that still haunts us, and only partially mitigated by Typescript. That is documented in "Javascript: The Good Parts". Or how the "async" keyword colors function calls, forcing everything in a call chain to also be async, or forcing you to use the older callbacks. Most people I talk to who love Typescript don't consider those as issues.

The _main_ problems are:

1. Async threads can easily get orphaned in Nodejs. This doesn't happen when using OTP on BEAM because you typically start a gen_server (or a gen_*) under a supervisor. Even processes that are not supervised can be tracked. Because pids (identifiers to processes) are first-class primitives, you can always access the scheduler which will tell you _all_ of the running processes. If you were to attach a Nodejs REPL, you can't really tell. This is because there is no encapsulation of the process, no way to track when something went async, no way to send control messages to those async processes.

2. Because async threads are easily orphaned, errors that get thrown gets easily lost. The response I get from people who love Typescript on Nodejs tells me that is what the linter is for. That is, we're going to use an external tool to enforce all errors gets handled, rather than having the design of the language and the runtime handle the error. In the BEAM runtime, unhandled errors within the process crashes the process, without crashing anything else; processes that are monitoring that process that crashed gets notified by the runtime that it has crashed. The engineer can then define the logic for handling that crash (retry? restart? throw an error?).

3. The gen_server behavior in OTP defines ways to send control messages. This allows more nuanced approaches to managing subsystems than just restarting when things crash.

I'm pretty much at the point where I would not really want to work on deploying Nodejs on the backend. I don't see how something like Deno would fix anything. Typescript is incapable of fixing this, because these are design flaws in the runtime itself.
by 8f2ab37a-ed6c | 2025-04-12 01:37:08+00:00
This is my pet theory, but I suspect that dev tools also get in the way of opportunities for promotion for engineers. Sure, buying an A/B testing tool will solve the problem of needing that tool, but it will add nothing to the resume of half a dozen people trying to get a promotion or an impressive project on their resume that they can then shop around at other firms. Dev tools go against resume-driven-development at larger firms, so in some sense they're doomed to fail. They make a lot of sense at earlier stages of companies where everybody's incentives are aligned around making the company win, and that might be the only opportunity the dev tool has to capture a logo and grow with them upmarket.
by toast0 | 2025-04-12 01:38:54+00:00
I'm biased, because I worked at WhatsApp, but it may be one of the most famous users of Erlang... and from its start until when I left (late 2019) I think we only hired three people with Erlang experience. Everyone else who worked in Erlang learned on the job.

We seemed to do pretty well, although some of our code/setup wasn't very idiomatic (for example, I'm pretty sure we didn't use the Erlang release feature properly at all)
by nhumrich | 2025-04-12 01:40:16+00:00
I love the idea of datastar, but wonder how does one test it without using e2e testing? Also, I think it would be amazing and so much simpler if instead of using SSE, it just included all the events in a response. Maybe with SSE as an option for those who need true server pushes? I feel like most apps don't require server push, and instead just need a list of events/things to update from an action.
by pmags | 2025-04-12 01:40:17+00:00
The actual data about food insecurity from the USDA tells quite a different story:

https://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/pub-details?pubid=1098...

In 2023...13.5 percent (18.0 million households) were food insecure. Food-insecure households (those with low and very low food security) had difficulty at some time during the year providing enough food for all their members because of a lack of resources...5.1 percent of U.S. households (6.8 million households) had very low food security...

Coincidentally, the collection of such detailed and useful data is at risk from the indiscriminate USDA firings.
by anigbrowl | 2025-04-12 01:40:43+00:00
If you made it to the end of the thread, the author (a menswear/garment industry expert) explained that he was responding to comments along the lines of 'Nike pays $2 to make shoes in Asia and sells them at $150, earning a $148 profit, we should bring some of that money to American workers'. I did not get the impression that the writer was characterizing Asian industry in general, he just happens to be knowledgeable about this particular industry.

I have been having similar discussions over the last week with people about synthesizers/pro audio gear (a topic I happen to be expert on), and the market dynamics are roughly the same. The goods themselves have a much smaller market and a much higher median cost than shoes, obviously. But components, assembly, and a significant amount of technical (PCB) design originates in China.
by cge | 2025-04-12 01:40:46+00:00
>Having an army of private lawyers vigorously prowling for contaminants in products is a pillar of Prop 65's success. You couldn't achieve what Prop 65 has with centralized regulation, not without creating tremendous (i.e. costly in time if not money) bureaucratic hurdles to creating and selling products in the market.

What makes cancer and reproductive risks unique such that labelling for them cannot be enforced by the government, and needs to be done by private enforcers motivated by profit? Why could the same type of law not simply be enforced, in a largely similar way, by a government agency?

I would generally agree that Prop 65 has had benefits, and that such labelling, in principle, could be a good thing (even if I'd really prefer if there were some requirement to actually give at least some explanation when putting a label). But the private enforcement has never made sense to me, unless one takes the view that the state actually opposes labelling and can't be trusted to enforce it.
by noduerme | 2025-04-12 01:40:59+00:00
Long polling is great for most things that don't need a realtime push. It just gets to be a strain on a server if you've got to set up and tear down lots of those connections from lots of users. Keeping a socket alive is a lot less resource intensive. Maybe it sounds stupid, but I've even converted PHP code that responded to long polling to handle the same polling over a socket to save resources. Most of my apps that need some kind of lazy updates actually work this way, and fall back to REST polling the same services if the socket is down.
by dghlsakjg | 2025-04-12 01:41:15+00:00
It depends on the maker, not all quartz watches are equal. However, quartz is typically very stable as an oscillator over the conditions that humans can survive in. That’s why we use it in watches after all.

That said, I have used a quartz watch (mid level Citizen) for actual celestial navigation at sea. It is, for all intents and purposes always going to be more accurate than mechanical (mine typically is good for ~1 second per month, and always in the same direction) Certified mechanical watches typically vary more than that in a day, I believe the standard is 2 seconds per day. I don’t know what a proper marine chronometer is certified to, but it is worth pointing out that a marine chronometer is typically not exposed to the conditions you describe at sea. The official ships chronometer is always kept down below, protected in what is effectively a gimballed humidor. For the purposes of navigational measurements, you use your wrist watch at the time of sighting on deck and add or subtract the difference between your watch and the chronometer. To add on to all that, if a ship is rolling and pitching like you describe your chances of an accurate sight are very low. Even in perfect conditions, it is hard to call the exact moment of alignment to within a second.

If I placed my quartz watch in the box with the official chronometer, I am perfectly willing to argue that if there is a discrepancy in the times shown, the quartz watch should be trusted.
by __loam | 2025-04-12 01:41:58+00:00
You can get a watch that's more accurate and more complex than one of these for under $1000 in an Apple watch or a Casio.

For me, this feels like one of the less harmful things rich people do. Ultimately you're paying a bunch of skilled labor in a developed state to maintain an artistic craft that uses very little energy and material, for a device that has worse functionality than one under $100. The only issue is where you got your money I suppose, and whether that money would have been better spent elsewhere.
by spacechild1 | 2025-04-12 01:42:12+00:00
> Daycare is suboptimal. Parents have a duty to and should have the freedom to take care if their kids.

Why should parents be the sole caretakers of young children? This is not the norm and never has been.

> A single income household is ideal over a dual income household with hired childcare.

Why should people have to choose between work and raising kids? Why not work less and do both?
by towledev | 2025-04-12 01:42:49+00:00
You’re selling your point short.

In my time in management, I found that the commonplace psychological descriptors we use failed to adequately describe what I was seeing. Two employees may both be “detail-oriented,” but there are subcategories within that depending on where the motivation comes from and those subcategories behave differently. Some people want that A+, some people like their squares square and their circles round (and it gives them anxiety when they’re not). Those groups are different, and I don’t know what to call them.

At bottom, there are ‘simple machines’ of psychology that, in combination with each other, produce behavioral traits at the top level. We don’t really have words for them, or at least not words I can think of for the ones I see.
by alganet | 2025-04-12 01:43:01+00:00
Your leader should think of that, not you. It's _their job_.

They should pair you, the speedster, with an accurate careful reviewer that doesn't code very fast. Pronto, that combination makes both 'weaknesses' disappear.

That's because they are not weaknesses. Humans fail, all of us. Teams exist for that.

Making a team work in harmony is your leader's responsibility. Do not let them slack on this. They are paid good money for this expectation. You are not, you earn as a bottom feeder. Why do his job?

He should also hire the right persons, looking to complement the team. If some skill is missing (like QA or review experienced engineers), that's their fault, not yours.
by throw0101d | 2025-04-12 01:43:57+00:00
> That said, John Harrison didn't have access to Solidworks and 6-axis CNC machines like today's high horology brands do.

When you get into some of these luxury brands they pride themselves on not using CNC machines. See for example "Machining a 0.6 mm Screw":

* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wKVqLTzh_z4
by geerlingguy | 2025-04-12 01:44:56+00:00
It's like 95% of the way there for me—there are a few little workflow niggles that keep me from fully switching over, like the inability to do a full export-close cycle without saving, without having to use my mouse (moving the hand to the trackpad/mouse is annoying when it's not necessary).

In Photoshop, likely because it's been used by pros for decades, little conveniences are all over the place, like the ability to press 'd' for 'Don't Save' in a save dialog box.

That said, the past few versions of Photoshop, which moved away from fully-native apps to some sort of web UI engine... they are getting worse and worse. On one of my Macs, every few weeks it gets stuck on the 'Hand' tool, no matter what (even surviving a preferences nuke + restart), until I reboot the entire computer.
by nextos | 2025-04-12 01:45:03+00:00
Panerai is a good example to estimate margins. When they were unknown, watches costed $1-2k. This was in the mid 90s. Same models now, distributed by a big luxury conglomerate, cost 5-10x more. Quality and components on comparable models are virtually the same.

Likewise, long ago, Rolex was a toolwatch brand and their products were relatively affordable. They are still great, but prices are insane. Vacheron Constantin is on a different class, though, as they sell lots of watches in the high horology category. Insanely complex and difficult to produce. Some similar brands have had financial issues or gone bankrupt.