MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by andrew-w | 2025-04-25 14:26:08+00:00
One way this differs is in the model architecture. Our approach relies on a single pass of a diffusion transformer (DiT), whereas Live Portrait relies on intermediate representations and multiple distinct modules. Getting a DiT to be real-time was a big part of our work. Quoting the Live Portrait paper: "Diffusion-based portrait animation methods [...] are usually [too] computationally expensive." As you hinted at, we had to compromise on resolution to get there (this demo is 256x256), but we think that will improve over time.
by 0xbadcafebee | 2025-04-25 14:26:18+00:00
Worth noting that people here are assuming that the author's assumption is correct, that his writing /etc/hosts is causing the 403, and that this is either a consequence of security filtering, or that this combination of characters at all that's causing the failure. The only evidence he has, is he gets back a 403 forbidden to an API request when he writes certain content. There's a thousand different things that could be triggering that 403.

It's not likely to be a WAF or content scanner, because the HTTP request is using PUT (which browser forms don't use) and it's uploading the content as a JSON content-type in a JSON document. The WAF would have to specifically look for PUTs, open up the JSON document, parse it, find the sub-string in a valid string, and reject it. OR it would have to filter raw characters regardless of the HTTP operation.

Neither of those seem likely. WAFs are designed to filter on specific kinds of requests, content, and methods. A valid string in a valid JSON document uploaded by JavaScript using a JSON content-type is not an attack vector. And this problem is definitely not path traversal protection, because that is only triggered when the string is in the URL, not some random part of the content body.
by entropi | 2025-04-25 14:26:49+00:00
I am also an immigrant, and my residency status has just recently decoupled from my employment status. I can imagine, and am happy for you too :).

Thankfully, I never experienced proper burnouts; but I did experience multiple cycles of being really invested in my job and just barely pushing myself to pay the bills. I do think with time, and by experiencing more cycles, I am getting closer to striking a healthier balance.
by scarface_74 | 2025-04-25 14:26:52+00:00
The only reason we had it before was because back in the 90s when I graduated, even outside of the dot com boom, regular old enterprise companies were looking for developers and there was a shortage. They didn’t have a choice but to hire juniors.

But as far as you get what you pay for, it’s not hard to find “good enough” framework enterprise developers and have a few good experience “seniors”. Especially with remote work, you dangle that in front of people my age, we are willing to take a haircut. For me now, remote work, autonomy, and a smaller company is worth being able to say “no” to more money when managers at Google (GCP) reach out to me.

By senior, I don’t mean “I codez real gud”, I mean the tech industries definition - someone who can deal with “scope” and “ambiguity” and has a history of highly impactful projects.

Just to be clear, I spent most of my career as an “enterprise dev” until 2020 at 46 when a position at AWS fell into my lap (Professional Services department). I’m no longer there. But it did cause me to pivot to cloud consulting specializing in app dev and now I am a “staff architect” at a third party company.
by harry-wood | 2025-04-25 14:26:54+00:00
The "Learning on the job" section brought back some memories of my experiences solo-developing a rails app. I made some of the same mistakes, although I think I mostly made the mistake of avoiding learning. I knew I should be writing tests with minitest or rspec, but never made time to learn it (instead I rolled my own request test framework!) And I stuck with subversion because I didn't fancy learning this newfangled git thing. When it finally came to hiring a second developer they had to teach me these things, and they thought I was an idiot :-(
by arp242 | 2025-04-25 14:26:58+00:00
Few years ago I had an application that allowed me to set any password, but then gave mysterious errors when I tried to use that password to login. Took me a bit to figure out what was going on, but their WAF blocked my "hacking attempt" of using a ' in the password.

The same application also stored my full password in localStorage and a cookie (without httponly or secure). Because reasons. Sigh.

I'm going to do a hot take and say that WAFs are bollocks mainly used by garbage software. I'm not saying a good developer can't make a mistake and write a path traversal, but if you're really worried about that then there are better ways to prevent that than this approach which obviously is going to negatively impact users in weird and mysterious ways. It's like the naïve /(fuck|shit|...)/g-type "bad word filter". It shows a fundamental lack of care and/or competency.

Aside: is anyone still storing passwords in /etc/passwd? Storing the password in a different root-only file (/etc/shadow, /etc/master.passwd, etc.) has been a thing on every major system since the 90s AFAIK?
by diggan | 2025-04-25 14:28:33+00:00
> It's interesting. I haven't been sucked into the Eurorack thing though — do people want not just patch cables all over their mixing desk but knobs as well?

I don't personally feel the need of wanting more cables all over my current setup, but sometimes I have had the feeling of "Oh if I could just modulate the VCF Cutoff on my Zen Delay with a patch cable from my modular instead of doing it manually" for some of the desktop units I have next to the modular.

And on the other side, I've also felt the need of having some of the patch holes replaced by knobs, so I could just twist and turn it to evaluate if I want to modulate it, instead of having to actually setup the patch. I could see something like this knob-idea being very useful for that, basically prototyping patches.

> I sense there are a lot of enthusiasts that do a lot more tinkering

This is definitely true, large parts of the community is about tinkering more than making music. But the same is true for programming, large parts of the community is not about problem solving, but coding. That's fine, we all have different motivations :)

What I found really useful (for myself at least) is to try to connect with people who are artists first, who just happen to be using modular synths, rather than finding people tinkering with modular synths who don't actually produce/perform music.

> I haven't been sucked into the Eurorack thing though

Good for you :) A friend pulled me into this dark abyss a month ago. Lots of fun, so many distractions, but lots of fun. Helps that Barcelona (where I live) have a lively community around modular synths as well. It is expensive though, and VCVRack doesn't come close to providing the same experience.
by hinkley | 2025-04-25 14:29:05+00:00
There was an old design I encountered in my distributed computing class, and noticed in the world having been primed to look for it, where you break ties in distributed systems with a supervisor whose only purpose was to break ties. In a system that only need 2 or 4 nodes to satisfy demand, the cost of running a 3rd of 5th node only to break ties results in a lot of operational cost. So you created a process that understood the protocol but did not retain the data, whose sole purpose was to break split brain ties.

Then we settled into an era where server rooms grew and workloads demanded horizontal scaling and for the high profile users running an odd number of processes was a rounding error and we just stopped doing it.

But we also see this issue re-emerge with dev sandboxes. Running three copies of Kafka, Redis, Consul, Mongo, or god forbid all four, is just a lot for one laptop, and 50% more EC2 instances if you spin it up in the Cloud, one cluster per dev.

I don’t know much Kafka, so I’ll stick with Consul as a mental exercise. If you take something like consul, the voting logic should be pretty well contained. It’s the logic for catching up a restarted node and serving the data that’s the complex part.
by trealira | 2025-04-25 14:29:16+00:00
From a draft of the C23 standard, this is what it has to say about union type punning:

> If the member used to read the contents of a union object is not the same as the member last used to store a value in the object the appropriate part of the object representation of the value is reinterpreted as an object representation in the new type as described in 6.2.6 (a process sometimes called type punning). This might be a non-value representation.

In past standards, it said "trap representation" rather than "non-value representation," but in none of them did it say that union type punning was undefined behavior. If you have a PDF of any standard or draft standard, just doing a search for "type punning" should direct you to this footnote quickly.

So I'm going to say that if the GCC developer explicitly said that union type punning was undefined behavior in C, then they were wrong, because that's not what the C standard says.
by camdenreslink | 2025-04-25 14:29:19+00:00
Hard work and talent are related to success. But when the outcome is "become the richest person in the world", hard work and talent are a rounding error compared to luck. Does anybody really think Zuckerberg is even in the top 5% hardest working or talented people in the world? A decision as inconsequential as rewriting Facebook to a different language in the early days could have derailed the entire enterprise. There is a lot of luck involved.
by fidotron | 2025-04-25 14:29:20+00:00
> If you want to sell software to schools, go and work in a bunch of them, find some obscure administrative problem, and solve that.

I think this principle generalizes to: If you want to sell software to X, go and work in a bunch of X, find some obscure administrative problem, and solve that.

Although some people seemingly have a talent for selling products into industries they have no idea about. I always assume that means a highly motivated buyer.
by buescher | 2025-04-25 14:29:39+00:00
This is so cool and so clever I'm in awe, really. I'm grinning from ear to ear looking at this and jealous I didn't think of it. But the problem it solves is not quite one that anyone has. What does it offer over a built-in knob with a jack that overrides it beside compactness? A knob that's not designed for feel that you can misplace?

There's a miniature case study in thinking about innovation here. This is what the germ of a really neat idea looks like but you have to keep going and that's hard.
by drweevil | 2025-04-25 14:29:44+00:00
Agree. If you are paying attention to the podcast while mopping the floor, there is no problem. But if you are doing reasoning work you are shortchanging either the podcast of your work, and in my experience often both. When I was still working (I'm now retired) I would listen to music while programming. Music seems to occupy a part of my mind that is not required for programming, and often even set the mood I needed. But a podcast? No.
by constantcrying | 2025-04-25 14:29:49+00:00
It is an interesting idea, but there is obviously a lot which can go wrong here.

Can you actually build an EV like that, conforming to all regulations, with significant cost reduction?

Do people actually want less screens or do they just say that? Is customization a road to profitability?(VWs ID.1 concept has a similar idea to lower entry price, by making several upgrades user installable, so they can be bought over time.

This is obviously a US only car and the US is very lacking in EV adoption. Will this sell in significant numbers?

Can you actually make it cheaply? Rivian is notoriously unprofitable and making cheap cars is, far, far harder than making expensive cars.
by somenameforme | 2025-04-25 14:29:53+00:00
You are mistaken on Einstein's past. He went from taking a 4 year teaching program to searching for an academic position for [literally] years. Nobody wanted him. He'd independently published one paper that he himself would describe was rubbish, and that was the extent of his academic experience. Even with his position at the patent office - he only managed to get that job through a friend, and even there was passed up for promotion due to apparent lack of competence. If you were to rank people who were likely to influence, let alone revolutionize science, he absolutely would not have been on the list.

And you can't really compare Einstein's achievement to anybody else, literally. The reason is not even because of the science itself, which really isn't that complex in hindsight, but a mixture of him solving such a pressing question that nobody else had "seen" as a possibility, alongside with its impact expanding far outside the academic world. Before Einstein our understanding of the universe was one of relative normality. He made it clear that the universe is unimaginably weird.

I do think the comparison with dark energy/matter is appropriate. Imagine a complete unknown, outside of academia, came out with something that not only completely cleanly explained these mysteries, but did so in a way that essentially required discarding everything we thought we knew about the universe. And by we I don't mean some people working in an abstract esoteric field that 99.999% of people have no idea even exists, but humanity. That is literally the level of what Einstein achieved, and it may not even be possible again - because it's sort of a 'right time, right place' type combination.

---

And this gets back to the point. Science, so far as persisting in the public mind, isn't about pushing some esoteric field forward, but about advancing humanity. If Einstein instead lived today, it's entirely possible he'd be just another competent academic making some advances, mostly of academic value, in some abstract and esoteric field. And people in 100 years would be none the wiser he even existed. The only way to escape this fate is to engage extensively in outreach. E.g. - Carl Sagan lives on not because of his achievements, but because of his public outreach. To a lesser degree the same is true of Feynman.
by kjs3 | 2025-04-25 14:30:55+00:00
Back in the day, you had Cray style vector registers, and you had CDC style[1] 'vector pipes' (I think I remember that's what they called them) that you fed from main memory. So you would (vastly oversimplifying) build your vectors in consecutive memory locations (up to 64k as I recall), point to a result destination in memory and execute a vector instruction. This works fine if there's a close match between cpu speed and memory access speed. The compilers were quite good, and took care of handling variable sized vectors, but I have no idea what was going on under the hood except for some hi-level undergrad compiler lectures. As memory speed vs cpu speed divergence became more and more pronouced, it quickly became obvious that vector registers were the right performance answer, basically everyone jumped that way, and I don't think anyone has adopted a memory-memory vector architecture since the '80s.

[1] from CDC STAR-100 and followons like the CDC Cyber 180/990, Cyber 200 series & ETA-10.
by propernun | 2025-04-25 14:31:02+00:00
Makes sense. I understand its not priority for engineers because they like codinf so much. But then I need to provide status to my PM and my stakeholders (incl my manager) too. It becomes hard for the rest of us. I guess thats why some companies hire a dedicated person to do this work -> ask every engineer about their task -> update task -> repeat -> get $120K salary. The other way I am thinking is to ask the "scrum master" to open every one's tasks one by one, and update it syncronously. Or ask every engineer to update it before they are done talking for their status update.
by diegof79 | 2025-04-25 14:31:19+00:00
The track record of Facebook and Google may be better because their open-source strategy is to never open things that are core to their business. Projects like React will not give you a competitive advantage to build a Facebook competitor. What a project like React gives to Facebook is marketing and a carrot to bring promising talent to the company.

The issue with VS Code is that it opened the door to many other editors, which, in a sense, drive people away from the Microsoft ecosystem. The combination of VSCode, GitHub, and TypeScript is ideal for MS: they win by attracting companies to GitHub services (which also offer code spaces based on VSCode); they also win by attracting users to Copilot, which helps them improve their tools. Creating an editor like VS Code is expensive; they are not paying the core developers because they prefer to give away money. They do it because it's part of their business strategy. You don't pay for VS Code; companies that subscribe to GitHub services do. A VS Code fork circumvents that strategy.
Show HN: KRDS – Korea Government Design System in React and MUI
by gracefullight | 2025-04-25 14:32:06+00:00
I built an implementation of the Korea Design System (krds.go.kr) using React and MUI.

- Storybook: https://krds.gracefullight.dev - NPM: https://www.npmjs.com/package/@gracefullight/krds - GitHub: https://github.com/gracefullight/krds - Figma: https://www.figma.com/community/file/1452915208095182951

To support developers working on public sector UIs, or anyone exploring frontend architecture and design systems in real-world projects.

Current limitations:

- Icons are from @mui/icons-material for now - Design tokens are static and will be refactored to improve developer experience.

Feedback & Contributions:

- Open to evolving this further with community input. - PRs and issues are always welcome, and I'd consider moving it to an organization if there's enough interest.
by TheOtherHobbes | 2025-04-25 14:32:21+00:00
If you switch from (forced) workaholism and burnout to the opposite, you're going to have whiplash. And perhaps PTSD.

I think the concept of personal freedom is hugely misunderstood. The US model seems to be some combination of wealth, privilege, and absence of social/financial obligation to others.

But we're seeing over and over that the people who attain that kind of freedom are often deeply unhappy, and sometimes deeply toxic.

Which is reflected all the way through work culture.

What would a non-toxic economy and work culture look like? Not just emotionally and personally, but in terms of social + economic structures and collective goals?

I've not seen many people asking the question. There's been a lot of oppositional "Definitely not like this", much of which is fair and merited.

But not so much "We could do try this completely new thing instead." Answers usually fall back to standards like "community" but there doesn't seem to be much thinking about how to combine big planet-wide goals with individual challenges and achievements with supportive social middleware that has to bridge the two.
by constantcrying | 2025-04-25 14:32:33+00:00
It is an interesting idea, but there is obviously a lot which can go wrong here. Can you actually build an EV like that, conforming to all regulations, with significant cost reduction?

Do people actually want less screens or do they just say that? Is customization a road to profitability?(VWs ID.1 concept has a similar idea to lower entry price, by making several upgrades user installable, so they can be bought over time.

This is obviously a US only car and the US is very lacking in EV adoption. Will this sell in significant numbers?

Can you actually make it cheaply? Rivian is notoriously unprofitable and making cheap cars is, far, far harder than making expensive cars.
by nolamark | 2025-04-25 14:32:44+00:00
Okay, one last project to share. If you are more a start from zero sort of person, see this wonderful set of videos on designing a 3d printable manual knitting machine. Realistically, more of a wonderful educational process you should see, than an economically viable one. (Meaning you can buy used mass produced hardware for cheaper.)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kUKiXIdw2pI&list=PLWDnfcUpk7...
by Nickersf | 2025-04-25 14:33:39+00:00
> We can finally just take a photo of a textbook problem that has no answer reference and no discussion about it and prompt an LLM to help us understand what's missing in our understanding of the problem, if our solution is plausible and how we could verify it.

I would take that advice with caution. LLM's are not oracles of absolute truth. They often hallucinate and omit important pieces of information.

Like any powerful tool, it can be dangerous in the unskilled hands.
by matt_heimer | 2025-04-25 14:33:46+00:00
The people configuring WAF rules at CDNs tend to do a poor job understanding sites and services that discuss technical content. It's not just Cloudflare, Akamai has the same problem.

If your site discusses databases then turning on the default SQL injection attack prevention rules will break your site. And there is another ruleset for file inclusion where things like /etc/hosts and /etc/passwd get blocked.

I disagree with other posts here, it is partially a balance between security and usability. You never know what service was implemented with possible security exploits and being able to throw every WAF rule on top of your service does keep it more secure. Its just that those same rulesets are super annoying when you have a securely implemented service which needs to discuss technical concepts.

Fine tuning the rules is time consuming. You often have to just completely turn off the ruleset because when you try to keep the ruleset on and allow the use-case there are a ton of changes you need to get implemented (if its even possible). Page won't load because /etc/hosts was in a query param? Okay, now that you've fixed that, all the XHR included resources won't load because /etc/hosts is included in the referrer. Now that that's fixed things still won't work because some random JS analytics lib put the URL visited in a cookie, etc, etc... There is a temptation to just turn the rules off.
by bondarchuk | 2025-04-25 14:34:30+00:00
Maybe they are tinkering, but sounds still come out while they are tinkering. So maybe they're playing music after all? The idea that if you're not recording and releasing tracks you're doing it "wrong" is a bit silly IMO. Just strumming a guitar or playing some chords on a piano without recording any of it was always an "acceptable" hobby and not considered "unmusical", playing with synths and sequencers is no different IMO.
by wizzwizz4 | 2025-04-25 14:34:45+00:00
Fabrice Bellard's work is impressive, but I wouldn't call it heroic. I was thinking more like, the grumpy-guts who ensures the local homeless shelter is adequately stocked with food, clean bedding, and toiletries, day-in and day-out, even in the depths of winter. You're allowed to be vaguely misanthropic in your interpersonal relationships if you're doing something like that, at least in my book.

Again, the only non-fictional people I know who qualify, are actually really nice to people.
by entropi | 2025-04-25 14:34:47+00:00
I get that having empathy with yourself and not hating yourself in case you have to face consequences of having ADHD is very important and good. But I would argue that not fearing the said consequences is a very different thing; and likely not even productive/feasible for a lot of people.

I got the impression that the author is advising for the latter too; considering the title and statements like

>You probably won't change their perceptions, so don't exhaust yourself trying to prove otherwise.
by Philpax | 2025-04-25 14:34:47+00:00
Yep, agreed on all accounts; I'm an advocate for Rust for Linux for these reasons, among others.

My thinking was that the Linux kernel already uses a custom dialect of C with specific features that benefit their workflow; I'm surprised that one of those features wasn't a

char[] charset = b"abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz";

that would allow for intent to be signalled to the compiler.