MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by UncleMeat | 2025-04-21 12:07:59+00:00
Francis was both things.

Within the scope of the Catholic Church he was progressive. His speeches were often in opposition to rising nationalism. He spoke about inclusion for people who haven't traditionally been included by the Church. In comparison to Benedict he was much more friendly to the global left.

But he was also a Catholic. The Church remains a global enemy to LGBT rights and its position on birth control is a source of death and devastation from AIDS as you mention. And the Church remains committed to a system of gender inequality within its ranks.

I do think that some of the lefty praise of Francis incorrectly ignores these problems. But also I'd rather have Francis than Benedict.

It'll be interesting to see what happens next. Two years ago I would have said that the next pope would certainly be a reactionary that returns to a more rigid conservatism. But with Trump elected and the rest of the world reacting to his idiocy I can see there being more limited appetite for a conservative turn within the Church leadership.
by ignoramous | 2025-04-21 12:08:01+00:00
> The dark gothic manoeuvers of US President Donald Trump in shutting down criticism seemingly by a combination of punishment by diktat and perverting the invocation of freedom of speech is an exemplar for the ages ... Trump's action is one man using the state to attack anyone he feels like, unfiltered, while musing openly about setting the Constitution aside, and using primary tools like funding and security clearance to escape oversight and control.

The imperial boomerang? Under the past Presidents, the US govt has acted in nefarious perhaps "unconstitutional" ways (especially when engineering regime changes or manufacturing consent for war). Now, the same freedom of action & impunity is sought by government actors in their own homeland? McCarthyism, as TFA notes, is back with a vengeance.

And indeed agencies have thrown the law book at their adversaries. To me, it seems as if is only when Trump does it, the press seems to be in an overdrive? Or perhaps, the Trump admin is boldly targetting the "untouchables"?

> the whole business has been massively obfuscated by that special blend of state secrecy and legal gaggery that characterizes an official attempt to do something we really need to know about without telling us

Such laws, often passed in the name of counter-terrorism, exist in most European countries, including ones where "digital privacy" companies are based (like Switzerland & Sweden). Curiously, when one thinks of Stasi-like surveillance, only countries like China come to mind. As such, you wouldn't use a Chinese email provider, but a Swiss one...?

All that said, the erosion of freedom is unfortunate, and voices like Bruce Scheiner's aren't impactful enough:

Despite fearful rhetoric to the contrary, terrorism is not a transcendent threat. A terrorist attack cannot possibly destroy a country’s way of life; it’s only our reaction to that attack that can do that kind of damage. The more we undermine our own laws, the more we convert our buildings into fortresses, the more we reduce the freedoms and liberties at the foundation of our societies, the more we’re doing the terrorists’ job for them.

https://www.schneier.com/essays/archives/2009/11/beyond_secu... (2009).
by latexr | 2025-04-21 12:08:13+00:00
> especially in a country like the US where ending up in court is prohibitively expensive

What’s the scenario here where they could take you to court for refusing to (in GP’s words) doing charity for them?

Scenario 1: Microsoft contacts you and says they want to talk about your open-source project. You never reply.

Scenario 2: Microsoft contacts you (…). You reply “thank you, but I’m not interested. You are of course free to contribute or fork within the constraints of the license.”

Scenario 3: Microsoft contacts (…). You reply “sure! I charge $X/hour or I could do a flat rate of $Y for the meeting. Is that acceptable to you?”

What basis would they have for taking you to court in any situation? As soon as you got a legal letter for any of them, your first step should be to send it to as many news outlets you could think of.
After writing over 10k+ blogs, here's what I learned about AEO
by proriterz | 2025-04-21 12:08:16+00:00
Before I proceed, I'm sure by now you know AEO is Answer Engine Optimization, or as some people call it- Ask Engine Optimization.

This is a new term which is used to denote how your contents and the website you're posting to, is affected and shown up on search result.

Let's be honest, nobody reads the whole article & Google knows this too. So with advent of AI they have brough back the updated culture of 'Featured Snippet' with some major changes to it.

Here's a practical example from one of our recent works in January

If you search for 'How Long Does It Take to See Results from ZO Skin Health' you'll see a featured snippet like this: https://prnt.sc/kVXUiCfFvF8Q

This featured snippet shows the answers and links back to the top 5 articles ranking on SERP on this subject (yes ranking).

The second link that says 'Initial Results (2-4) weeks' as well, links to 1 article only, which is ours. https://prnt.sc/pcIqWJc2mn3b

Proof that it is our article (highlighted the part being shown in the result): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Wn6bfQESJzYAPFMDmuspygIVxUBTlX_PwBmub2DOmDI/edit?usp=drivesdk

Now 80% of our works were optimized for Google and not exactly for AEO or Snippets because we wanted page views and not quick answers. However for some of our smaller local service clients, & saas, this worked pretty well.

One example of SaaS client where our writing, and optimization worked is this property management software on SERP: https://prnt.sc/Z22PbFLBIr9_

Now that we saw that we can rank on AI overview here are few things you should do to try & optimize your chances.

Use proper structured data For example in the first one there was 'ListItem' & for second was 'WebPage' schema added apart from other schemas. It's important that Google knows what's he ranking.

Forget writing just after the start I remember doing this 'sandwich formula' of writing info content. Infact one of my early sites that I have sold now, was built on this formula of 'writing answers directly' under the H1 for example:

For 'Is it safe to feed leaves to your pet dragon?'

Article starts with-

Pet dragons are one of the most popular type of 'pets' widely accepted globally, due to it's inert nature, and ability to survive in domestic treatment.

Yes, it's safe to feed leaves to your pet dragon, as in their natural habitat, they would anyways have those.

Then.....

This formula has been history now, and you can answer comprehensively under any headings. A small trick to do this

Ask AI to write the topic in detail of 1000 words.

Then ask it to summarise the answer in a paragraph of no more than 3 sentences.

You can take inspiration or directly copy that paragraph only as it's written by AI following what AI's prefer to give in snippets nowadays.

3. Always make sure the content is in active voice. Voice search, AI results don't prefer contents written in passive. It's easier to speak in active & so, write in active.

Try these and let me know how it goes?

Keep writing!
by caseyy | 2025-04-21 12:08:57+00:00
Of the current widely accepted papabili, Peter Turkson is from Sub-Saharan Africa. He is softly pro-LGBT, and he seeks to harmonize the progressive homosexuality views with traditional African culture[0]. I don't think Robert Sarah is considered papabile, possibly owing to his message of hate for homosexuality. Overall, it's inconsistent with the recent message of the church, and it is hard to imagine that progressive Catholics would accept it.

Here's a Reuters list for possible Francis successors: https://www.reuters.com/world/who-might-succeed-pope-francis.... Usually, Reuters does thorough due diligence before releasing something. So I'd expect their predictions are accurate.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Turkson
by Kudos | 2025-04-21 12:09:18+00:00
I switched from official Fedora images when I got sick of dealing with nonfree stuff like codecs and nvidia drivers. They have much more lightly modified images that are better as a base to build on. I use https://github.com/ublue-os/main (and https://github.com/ublue-os/hwe for an nvidia system).
by Zambyte | 2025-04-21 12:09:58+00:00
Original license of Redis is retained in the form Valkey:

https://github.com/valkey-io/valkey/blob/unstable/COPYING

Third party licenses retained in a THIRDPARTY file in MariaDB

https://github.com/MariaDB/server/blob/main/THIRDPARTY

Only two good examples I could quickly find.
by pjc50 | 2025-04-21 12:10:42+00:00
Had to check, and was surprised to see that new reactors have actually come online in the last couple of years. https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=228&t=21

Hydro still growing too despite the occasional dam removal project: https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=61883

But the reason wind and solar are winning is that they're so, so much easier to deploy. More countries should legalize balcony solar, too.
by BiteCode_dev | 2025-04-21 12:11:30+00:00
It has lazy enumeration with generators, but:

- string construction is a hot path, you don't want them to always be lazy, especially since any access is slow in python. - having it using a string syntax is just very clean and easy to read. It's explicit and can be supported by good editor highlighting. - it's easy to grep, analyse for, substitute, etc. - you get one single unified API instead of thousands of variations. Translations API, log API and escaping API can all look the same, arguments are in the same shapes.
by koiueo | 2025-04-21 12:11:52+00:00
(A)GPLv3 does not prevent their projects from being used.

That's the point!

GPL family of licenses would've made a difference in this aspect for libraries (because afair if you link to GPL code, you must be GPL). But for an app? You can use it, fork it, modify it... Just make sure you make your changes available under the same license. Seems very fair to me.
by fragmede | 2025-04-21 12:13:43+00:00
There was a meeting about the new machine after it was installed. It wasn’t meeting spec - jamming up other machines, slowing everything down. People tried working around it, adjusting workflows, but nothing fixed the underlying issue.

At a certain point, you’d just replace the machine.

But here’s the thing - this wasn’t just any machine, and it was causing real problems.

Turns out, in this case, the “new machine” is Tony. And Tony’s kind of a racist. He’s tanking morale, making people feel unsafe. But management keeps him around because “he works hard.”

If Tony were a literal machine causing this kind of disruption, you’d replace him without a second thought. But because he’s a person, and management doesn’t want to deal with it, they let the damage spread. That’s not just bad leadership - that’s liability.

So what do you think Tesla should be responsible for - just the machines, or also when someone like ‘Tony’ starts throwing the whole system off?

If you keep someone like Tony around, knowing the damage he’s causing, you’re not neutral - you’re endorsing his behavior.
by TheDong | 2025-04-21 12:14:20+00:00
So you're saying that TikTok's support team doing a poor job of handling reports is proof that the engineering team wasn't tasked with reducing spam by writing code obfuscation?

TikTok is a huge company, evidence of what the support department does or doesn't do has only minor bearing on the whole company, and basically none on the engineering department.

The thing that seems most likely to me is that they care about spam, the engineering department did this one thing, and the support department is either overworked or cares less. Or really efficient which is why you only see "a lot of spam", not "literally nothing but spam".
by ryao | 2025-04-21 12:14:35+00:00
It is a fairly standard practice in at least some open source communities to add copyright notices to files that people have changed significantly, although there is no well defined minimum threshold for how much permits them to add a copyright notice. Thus, someone else can come along, fork the project, add copyright notices to all of the files and then give the impression that they wrote them, since there is no attribution aside from the one LICENSE file that you wrote. The git history might show the truth, but if they copy the files into a fresh git repository, that metadata will be lost. Projects take files from one another all the time, so there is no guarantee that they will preserve your commit history and then anyone curious who wrote the code needs to do digital archaeology.

That said, file level copyright notices are not perfect (since only the VCS shows who added what lines and that might not be preserved), but it is better than nothing and it is something that is guaranteed to persist as long as people are abiding by licenses. If they are not, that is copyright infringement and the copyright holder can do things like send cease and desist notices in response to the copyright notices being removed.

Also, I must emphasize that I am not a lawyer, but one might argue that it was not willful infringement if someone removed a copyright notice from 1 file by claiming it had been a mistake. However, if they remove it from all files, then nobody is going to believe it was not willful.
by acidburnNSA | 2025-04-21 12:14:52+00:00
Hi, sorry to say, but that's actually a myth. The US never did and never seriously planned to make weapons from commercial reactors. We make weapons with special graphite or heavy water moderated weapons production reactors. The MSRE was shut down because:

* The existing major industrial and utility commitments to the LWR, HTGR, and LMFBR.

* The lack of incentive for industrial investment in supplying fuel cycle services, such as those required for solid fuel

* The overwhelming manufacturing and operating experience with solid fuel reactors in contrast with the very limited involvement with fluid fueled reactors.

* The less advanced state of MSBR technology and the lack of demonstrated solutions to the major technical problems associated with the MSBR concept.

ref: WASH-1222 https://doi.org/10.2172/4372873
by gortok | 2025-04-21 12:15:18+00:00
Indeed; and when the Second Vatican Council decided Mass should be said in the vernacular, the obligation of the Church was to follow. Instead, the conservatives of the church ('conservative' here means those that emphasize adhering to tradition and are adverse to change) created a rift by eschewing this change and even heightening the importance of the Latin Mass, creating the impression that a mass spoken in the local language was somehow less of a mass.

If you’re Catholic, suggesting that a mass spoken in one language over another is somehow "less" takes away from the most important idea of the Mass: reenacting Christ’s Last supper commandment and the institution of the Holy Eucharist for what amounts to word games.

This divisive description of the mass increased over the decades, to the point that it threatened to cause a schism. As such it was the Holy Father’s duty to resolve the issue.
by thomasmg | 2025-04-21 12:15:25+00:00
Thanks for reading and taking the time to respond!

> Doesn't this go against the "literals are enclosed in quotes" idea?

Sure, one could argue that other changes would also be useful, but then it would be less concise. I think the main reasons why people like regex are: (a) powerful, (b) concise.

For my V2 proposal, the new rule is: "literals are enclosed in quotes", the rule isn't "_only_ literals are enclosed in quotes" :-) In this case, I think `-` can be quoted as well. I wanted to keep the v2 syntax as close as possible to the existing syntax.
by sublimefire | 2025-04-21 12:15:41+00:00
This post is a great example why the choice of a license matters. You never know what your code will evolve into, so why give away your countless hours to a company/3rdparty that does not really care (aws, msft, goog, etc). License matters and large companies would not risk litigation and even if they do, that would be a great way to earn money down the road for the copyright holder. The only FOMO with MIT is that your code will prob not gonna be easily used by 3rd parties in production which would diminish the popularity effect. On the other hand, I think that code has more value if it uses a copyleft license and I am much more inclined to contribute to it.
by thoroughburro | 2025-04-21 12:15:46+00:00
> For example I pondered why phone manufacturers didn't use a p2p protocol for distributing updates and had an enlightening conversation with a person who worked for a major telco chiming in as to why that would be problematic for their infrastructure. > … > I have presences on Mastodon and Bluesky, but my follower count on both remains in the low teens. I don't think the market is there anymore for "dude that ponders technology questions". I tweet like it's 2010 and no one cares anymore.

So, you miss having access to experts in fields you’re a layman to. That makes sense.

I wonder though if the experts miss your random guesses about their work? If they miss the compulsion to correct your assumptions before misinformation takes hold?
by giancarlostoro | 2025-04-21 12:16:00+00:00
> The best advice for open source maintainers who are being approached by large tech companies is to be very wary

Drop them a consultation fee in the thousands per hour, get something out of it at least. If they're going to reimplement your project, there's absolutely 0 you can do, they will just hire an intern and tell them the requirements for what you have built without having to meet you, ask them for expenses out of your day covered.
by pron | 2025-04-21 12:16:31+00:00
My "manic praise" extends to the novelty of the feature as Zig's design is revolutionary. It is exciting because it's very rare to see completely novel designs in programming languages, especially in a language that is both easy to learn and intended for low-level programming.

I wait 10-15 years before judging if a feature is "good"; determining that a feature is bad is usually quicker.

> With comptime types, according to what I’ve read, you’ll have to bring your T to the comptime and find out right then and there if it will work. Without enough foresight it might not.

But the point is that all that is done at compile time, which is also the time when all more specialised features are checked.

> That’s not something I want. I just want generics or parametric polymorphism or whatever it is to work once it compiles.

Again, everything is checked at compile-time. Once it compiles it will work just like generics.

> I mean just let me use the language declaratively.

That's fine and expected. I believe that most language preferences are aesthetic, and there have been few objective reasons to prefer some designs over others, and usually it's a matter of personal preference or "extra-linguistic" concerns, such as availability of developers and libraries, maturity, etc..

> Now I’m not so sure?

Personally, I wouldn't dream of using Zig or Rust for important software because they're so unproven. But I do find novel designs fascinating. Some even match my own aesthetic preferences.
by throwaway277432 | 2025-04-21 12:16:33+00:00
I've seen plenty of both. I've added one good example in my other comment. But it certainly depends on the community and programming language as to how serious licensing is treated.

But yes, many people are not complying with the license literally, and it's frustrating to see. I know it basically doesn't matter unless you go to court over it, but still it irks me and screams a sort of carelessness about the rules and social contract.

Sorry for criticising your reading comprehension, I did not mean it as a personal insult.

It's just that I see these types of responses so often, basically every time any licensing question comes up. Twice in this thread. And all that's required is to just read the very short and basic MIT license text itself, no lawyering required.

I can understand the native speaker part, but just know that I myself am not a native speaker either. But I understand that's a huge barrier.

But even native speakers on HN with serious software engineering jobs and skill don't understand it, or don't want to understand. I think it's a bit like when people see math proofs, they mentally just skip over it.

That's the part that continues to amaze me.
by nhumrich | 2025-04-21 12:18:09+00:00
The PEP was initially proposed this way. But due to various reasons, making it an open namespace was considered to overcomplicate the language (read: understanding coffee when reading it). Alternatively, there doesn't really seem to be much loss of ability with t-strings. Libraries can require a template as it's accepted type, instead of having to invent their own custom type and named template.
by LegionMammal978 | 2025-04-21 12:18:11+00:00
The idea behind permissive licensing like this is that you don't particularly care about "eroding the original": you don't see its ineffable status in relation to others' work as something that must forever be maintained.

I've also leaned toward CC0-style licensing for some of my smaller projects, that are shared for explanatory or artistic purposes. The reasoning is that GPL-style licenses give the code its own 'weight' as a unit, that keeps others from lifing good ideas from the code and incorporating them into their own projects as they wish, at any point in the next ~135 years. (The barriers aren't just the stereotypical "how dare they make me share my code!" but also the realities of license compatibility, having to make sure never to lose any version of the source, and so on.)

I agree with GP that this isn't necessarily the best idea for large projects that exist for their own sake and that companies might find great profit in copying. But it's not like all projects fit that description.
by ta1243 | 2025-04-21 12:18:26+00:00
Nuclear is no use for the grid as it can't flex. Sometimes a grid needs 80 units, sometimes 50 units. Nuclear can't provide 80 units all the time as its unaffordable, can't increase or decrease output economically, and only makes sense when they're run 24/7 (except when it has to go offline for maintenence or other issues like heatwaves [0])

[0] https://www.euronews.com/green/2023/07/13/frances-nuclear-po...
by 0xTJ | 2025-04-21 12:19:03+00:00
I always choose permissive licenses for personal project, and I often avoid depending on other projects that aren't permissive. If I want to know that, if I need to, I can grab the code and change something. And I want others to be able to remix what I make as needed.

The more limitations added on a license, the less open it is.
by southernplaces7 | 2025-04-21 12:19:08+00:00
So Pope Francis departs for a meeting with his boss perhaps?

Jokes aside, he seemed like a genuinely decent human being and enough of a humanist to cast aside some of the drier absurdities surrounding the bureaucracy of Catholic Church administration, and ideology.

Even as someone who's deep in the skeptically agnostic camp on any questions about supreme creators (after all even a firm atheist can't be absolutely sure there is no genuine God) I had more respect for the apparent practical concern for humanity of this pope, particularly compared to the more typical nature of historical pontiffs.
by trescenzi | 2025-04-21 12:19:13+00:00
I studied CS and Philosophy in college. The philosophy department at the time was struggling to get people to declare so they started a campaign with the slogan “Thinking of a major? Major in thinking”. Which I’ve always thought was both clever and accurate. Such departments become more valuable as the harder skills are more automatable. I doubt that will translate into more philosophy majors but one can dream.