MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by markus_zhang | 2025-04-23 03:34:32+00:00
IMO, getting a habit might need a "click", a resolution.

I tried many times to get into exercise, but only got into a regular schedule (daily) recently. I don't even know what happened but there is definitely a click. The number of days is not so important. Something inside just told me to do it. Same with fasting. Somehow I got into 72-hour water fast with zero preparation and "habit" a few months ago and have been doing it once or twice a month.

How to get the click is more interesting. I wish I could generate those clicks for things I want to do but not dying to do.
by cookiengineer | 2025-04-23 03:35:02+00:00
The Internet Archive should have realized earlier that they've set up shop within hostile territory.

I would support the IA more if they would setup their foundation, hardware and hosting in a more neutral country towards censorship. Especially given the current (and never ending) hostile administration.

Initiatives like this that preserve culture exceeding the knowledge of societies should be treated like museums, not like companies. And American corporatism will eventually win against the IA. Even when their fight continues for the next 10 years in the legal system, they won't be able to win.

From an operational standpoint it would make much more sense to relocate somewhere where both digital censorship is not happening and where DMCA and other means do not apply. And for that you have to make the financial structure of the company unsueable, like the mega tech corporations effectively are setup with their exploitations of licensing fees in Netherlands, residencies in Ireland or official headquarters not in the US, or holdings on the Cayman Islands.

Additionally I would love to cohost the things I care about, but there is effectively no easy option right now. All the science related books that I care about are lost in their crappy search interface. And most of the collections are in the league of cephFS-sized clusters, making them unusable for most potential cohosters. And I'm saying that as someone that has around 600TB at home available for that kind of stuff.

It would be much better if there was an option to "build your own torrent cohost" where you can opt-in to specific media or websites/domains you want to keep and to help share/contribute as bandwidth and storage.

Right now for that purpose, kiwix is a much better alternative in my opinion, because you just download the archived files for each website, add them to a folder and that's it. I wish the web archive had something like that.
by bombela | 2025-04-23 03:35:27+00:00
To be clear, I didn't not mean to imply that I find Helm to be good at all. I am with you on all the negatives here.

I think the general idea behind kustomize is great. Sadly the execution is a mess of complicated code, with a billion of useless abstractions. Culminating into a tool that doesn't do what it promises. Including infinite loops. Yes I have had it get stuck on infinite loops during text matching.

And before anybody tells me to contribute to kustomize instead of complaining: 1) pay me for it. 2) actually don't, I don't want to touch this codebase. Reading it was traumatizing enough.
by lutusp | 2025-04-23 03:35:27+00:00
Not the topic of most comments, but instead of a 22 ohm resistor that burns up the majority of the battery power to protect the LED from overcurrent, a switching power supply would allow the light to run more than twice as long for the same available battery energy.

And I agree with other comments that linking products to their manufacturers is deplorable -- you don't own a modern product, it owns you.
by credit_guy | 2025-04-23 03:35:46+00:00
For those who live in or visit New York City, a little known gem worth checking out is a mini-museum inside the New York Public Library in midtown, next to Bryant Park. It is a single room, called "Treasures". Here's an illuminated manuscript from the 1300's [1].

[1] https://imgur.com/a/qPnpP40
by tptacek | 2025-04-23 03:37:12+00:00
You mistake me. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with saying the mass in Latin. I'd kind of like to go see one! Put my 4 years of Jesuit Latin to use! But no, I don't think that's going to be a big draw for ordinary people to join the church.

My Greek Orthodox friends growing up definitely spoke Greek!
by protocolture | 2025-04-23 03:37:32+00:00
I am quite familiar because I keep reading about it everytime someone insists its too hard, falling all over references demonstrating just how easy it was.

Heck I believe it was on this very website someone posted a study by a group of students who went to the actual quarry the stone was from, and actually carved out a stone using period techniques.

As far as I am concerned, pyramid denial is dead save a few absolute moronic hold outs who seem to believe copper tools cant cut stone.
by thomassmith65 | 2025-04-23 03:39:55+00:00
The original comment seemed knowledgeable and informative.

It ended with a complaint about downvotes...

...but it began by insulting the audience.

It wasn't clear to me if you were too close to the comment to realize why people downvoted it.

I thought a critique might be helpful. Apparently, it wasn't welcome, but my intentions were good.
by FadreWulf | 2025-04-23 03:40:19+00:00
You are correct that particles of the same type are fundamentally identical in ideal quantum theory. My use of “unique signatures” refers to the distinct quantum state or measurable properties a particle (such as a qubit) exhibits in an open, realworld environment that is shaped by fields, noise, and context, while the particle itself remains fundamentally indistinguishable from others of its type. The HOM effect is fully valid in idealized systems; my work addresses the complexities found in practical, noisy environments. If conditions were truly ideal, decoherence wouldn’t be an issue now would it? Listen, I understand that what I'm claiming may seem way out there. I understand that, while I genuinely want questions and I want genuine feedback. Please remain professional.
by gus_massa | 2025-04-23 03:40:52+00:00
You mean like the Bigfoot video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xVo6Vj0_Xbo ?

People cheat, even in single games. If there is an online game to find birds IRL, there is an achievement to find a dodo, someone will find it.

I've also see a lot of dubious or even wrong results in preprints and journal articles, so the only conclusion is that there are morons and liars everywhere. Trust but verify.
by analog31 | 2025-04-23 03:41:27+00:00
I consider this to be a good question, but with a reasonably familiar answer:

Rotation is absolute. Unlike linear motion, you can tell if you're sitting in a rotating frame of reference or not. Experiments such as the Coriolis force, and Foucault's pendulum, are demonstrations of this principle.

In fact, a historical oddity is that when this idea was nailed down by both theory and experiment, the Catholic Church dropped its ban on heliocentrism. (Not that it mattered, the horse had already left the barn).
by AStonesThrow | 2025-04-23 03:41:34+00:00
And yet, our borders have been peaceful for the most part, as really no foreign army has invaded the United States in a long, long time. There have been two World Wars in Europe, yet our interior has remained sacrosanct for longer than that.

And the United States has established embassies and consulates all over the world. We're founding members of the U.N.; we're on the Security Council. We send humanitarian missions all over the place. Surely you cannot argue, with a straight face, that "peace and diplomacy" have not built the society we enjoy today?

Peace and diplomacy are not in a vacuum for us, certainly -- there have been wars; there has been espionage; there have been terrorist attacks. But peace and diplomacy are the primary way, and a more excellent way, and they are avenues that will always be explored and exhausted before violence takes over.
by lutusp | 2025-04-23 03:47:32+00:00
Having sailed solo around the world, I know this well-intentioned idea won't work. Modern large ships can't change course quickly enough to avoid collisions with objects close enough to be detectable.

Any number of times, a large-ship captain would radio me saying, "Whatever you do, don't change course or speed -- we can get past you as long as you don't change anything."

And I was a distant sailboat with a radar reflector, not a subtle biological target at close range.
Show HN: Product Hunt Buries Indies. I Built a Platform That Doesn't
by lakshikag | 2025-04-23 03:48:12+00:00
I’m an indie maker myself. No big network, no marketing budget, just trying to build cool stuff and get it in front of real people. Like many of you, I’ve launched on Product Hunt and watched my project disappear within hours under a pile of flashy, funded launches. It’s feeling more and more like a pay-to-win game. If you’re just a solo maker without a network or budget, good luck getting noticed on there.

So I built ItsLaunched.com - a fair launch platform made specifically for indie makers.

Here’s how it works:

> Only 10 products per day. No endless scrolling, no getting buried by big players.

> No “skip the line” BS - it’s free and first come, first serve. Period.

> 2 votes per user per day to support the products they genuinely believe in. No vote spamming, no fake hype.

> Every product gets a juicy DR backlink

> If your launch doesn’t go as planned, you can relaunch later. No penalties.

> You also get badges as a user, and if your product lands in the top 3 of the day, you’ll get a special badge on top of that.

So far, 400+ products have launched and it's growing into a small but solid community of builders who actually care.

Would love your thoughts and yes, I’m building this solo as a someone in the same boat as you. Let’s make launches fair again and if you have feedback, I’m all ears.
by behnamoh | 2025-04-23 03:48:39+00:00
macOS keyboard shortcuts situation is weird. it shines where Windows is lacking, and falls behind where Windows is ahead.

Example:

I still don't know how to install an app (*.pkg) just using keyboard on macOS. On Windows, it's simply "press tab or alt and see what happens". Another example: on Windows I can press Alt and see a letter underlined in the menu to let me know what keyboard shortcut activates it, but on macOS I have to do Cmd-Shift-/ and search for the command.

On the other hand, on macOS I get to create custom keyboard shortcuts in the Settings app while Windows, afaik, doesn't have this feature.

I can make a new folder on macOS and put the selected files in it automatically if I do Ctrl-Cmd-N, but if I want to "show package contents" of an app in the Applications, I definitely need a mouse! On Windows machines there's often a right-click button which is really useful
by reasonableklout | 2025-04-23 03:49:24+00:00
Scott was enlisted to evangelize the project. My understanding is that he didn't have a hand in the forecast, and if you watch his interview with Dwarkesh[1], he states his timeline is _longer_ than the one that the team published in ai-2027.com.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=htOvH12T7mU&t=9882s&pp=ygUTZ...
by protocolture | 2025-04-23 03:49:48+00:00
>and then drawing conclusions, and updating the theory as appropriate.

This bit never happens.

What does occur is that the hypothesis just twists to ignore new data. Hancock has claimed that as he isn't a scientist he doesn't need to include the facts that disagree with his ideas. He sees himself as a champion of an idea, and cherry picks facts to craft the best possible case for that idea. IE: Hes a massive fraud and waste of time.

> I just take issue with people confidently stating that it's been proven false.

I take issue with the idea that this entire argument has to happen again, politely and fresh, for anyone who pops up on the internet having read some cherry picked nonsense about atlantis. Why is it our collective responsibility to educate you. Its not even the responsibility of scientists to prove or disprove your claims, if you are making positive claims you should be either presenting or locating evidence for those claims. Also to note, evidence doesnt mean "Hey this sounds a bit like some old folklore".

>I for one just would like to know the truth, whatever it might be.

All offense intended, but the people who go on about this stuff have already arrived at their desired truth, and they are simply defending their truth from the slings and arrows of reality. Get on a boat, go investigate the Richat structure, come back with evidence, otherwise the current evidence stands.
by vbezhenar | 2025-04-23 03:50:04+00:00
You can't compare humans with elephants or birds. We are extremely different species with different evolution paths. It is very possible, that bird brains is much more optimized, but that tells nothing about our brains.

We can compare humans with our ancestors and trend is clear: our skull was getting bigger, despite the fact that it's not good for evolution, until some point after which it started to shrink.

Whether it translates to cognition increase or decline - we probably will never find out, we don't have time machine. But that's the most obvious assumption. Big skull is bad for birth, so evolution pressure on making skull smaller is enormous. Big brain is bad for energy efficiency, because brain consumes a lot of energy and food is scarce in the wild, so that's another evolution pressure. The fact that our ancestors kept growing head despite that evolution pressure meant that advantage was bigger. And intelligence is the only factor that comes to mind which can offset the negatives.
by larusso | 2025-04-23 03:51:43+00:00
macports had the cleaner packages. Macports created its own base library so that packages are not based on the macOS system libraries which managed to break them when doing system updates with brew or when you decided to stay longer on an older macOS version. That meant that packages from macports took longer to install and compile. That was from the time when bottles where not a thing yet. Brew was fast but unstable. In my opinion the inferior project won. But to brews defence they also addressed the issues over the years. Don‘t have any sources at hand but I remember a time when the brew project compared itself to macports and pointed out that their faster because they don‘t recompile all base libraries etc etc. And they had to realize that this wasn‘t a great idea. Now packages are practically split between different os versions. And different bottles are served depending which macOS version you run.

Edit: And I got reminded that it was possible to run and install packages for and from multiple users. Brew took over /usr/local/bin and other /usr/local/homebrew for the running user. Managing a system with multiple users with brew was and still is hard. With macports you needed sudo like with most other package managers. The sudo less nature was a huge deal for its adoption. And now maybe a security risk if you ask me.
by maxloh | 2025-04-23 03:51:45+00:00
You can just use styled-conponents on React.

const Button = styled.button<{ $primary?: boolean; }>` /* Adapt the colors based on primary prop */ background: ${props => props.$primary ? "#BF4F74" : "white"}; color: ${props => props.$primary ? "white" : "#BF4F74"}; ... `; render( <div> <Button>Normal</Button> <Button $primary>Primary</Button> </div> );
by jpk | 2025-04-23 03:52:32+00:00
Your entire comment is threat modeling, which is great! But it demonstrates my point: using an old, insecure thing is sometimes obscure enough to fly under the radar of one class of threats, but presents a juicy attack surface for another class of threats. And one's own personal risk for any given class of threats will vary depending on one's circumstances. So the parent comment's unqualified statement of, "security is not a consideration for such devices," isn't quite right.
by bluesnowmonkey | 2025-04-23 03:53:17+00:00
The value of Amazon.com is not the cost to produce the HTML and JavaScript you see when you visit that website. It is a component of the Amazon business, and to Amazon it is extremely valuable, and to everyone else it would be almost worthless.

If someone has the idea for the next Amazon, as well as everything else you need beyond the idea, and tools like Supabase and Lovable allow them to get it off the ground, those tools are incredibly valuable to that person.

If someone’s ideas are worthless, their websites will be worthless.
by philipswood | 2025-04-23 03:54:52+00:00
Nitpick: "Atoms are called atoms because they have no subdivisible parts".

Oops, it turns out we used the name too soon.

When people say "universe" these days they mean the "visible universe" (or maybe the visible universe plus the stuff we're sure is there, but that falls outside our light cone now) - and not the original definition of the word anymore.

(Not that we have "found" anything else yet.)
by jjk166 | 2025-04-23 03:55:01+00:00
Who do these teams report to? Either someone at a higher level instituted guidelines which allowed for inconsistent stacks, or someone at a lower level made the decision to disregard these guidelines and upper management took no action at the appropriate time to address the situation.

Either decision could easily be justifiable. The higher ups may have deliberately wanted to assure the teams were not stifled, or a team may have had a goal which demanded an exception to the rule. Still though, somebody had to have made the call and should therefore be able to justify it.

If an organization does not know who is responsible for something, then that is a failing at an even higher level.
by SoftTalker | 2025-04-23 03:55:33+00:00
This confuses blame with being deserving. Do victims deserve what happens to them? No, generally not. Someone who is attacked and assaulted in a dark alley at 2:00 in the morning does not deserve that, the perpetrator would be to blame for that. But could the person have avoided it by not being there at at that time? Yes, at least in many cases.

Thinking one can skip down the trail of life without having to watch out for wolves is just being naive. Most of us lock our doors at night.
by badlucklottery | 2025-04-23 03:59:54+00:00
> Why does chrome demand $400m in input spend ongoing, if it no longer has to deliver Google specific changes?

I don't know if it needs $400m but I wouldn't be surprised if it's $20m+ just to keep the browser secure.

Google paid out $12m last year in bug bounties and I assume they spend that much or more for in-house security researchers/developers (headcount is expensive) and periodic independent audits of the codebase.
by za3faran | 2025-04-23 03:59:57+00:00
The local culture was indeed preserved; anyone can verify this, it's a historical given.

I'm not victim blaming. The orientalists were not victims were they?

> There is a reason no non-Muslims are interested in living under a Muslim caliphate

I'll just leave this here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bc6yXYR01Vg
by Suppafly | 2025-04-23 04:01:53+00:00
My company uses guildeducation.com and we can use basically $5k a year (I think, it might be semester), a lot of if it is just individual classes, but there are also some degree programs. I don't know if they preselect which courses are available to us or if we have access to the whole catalog. I suspect it's somewhat curated, because we are a medical company and most of it is medical stuff. There is a CS bachelor's program but last I checked there wasn't an MS CS program.
by amirathi | 2025-04-23 04:02:31+00:00
I took a stab at this ~7 years ago - https://nurtch.com/

The idea has a lot of merit. We even gave a talk about it in JupyterCon Paris 2023 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TUYY2kHrTzs

When you have executable code in the documentation, folks want to follow PR-review workflow with the docs as well - which is a bit more team investment than editing a wiki.

Good luck!
by protocolture | 2025-04-23 04:06:14+00:00
>Damn some of the comments here are really depressing. I'd formerly thought HN was one of the last bastions of critical thought on internet, but I guess I was wrong judging by some of these comments. Way too much regurgitation of long-since debunked pseudo-scientific nonsense.

Knowledge, I keep insisting, comes in silos.
by reaperman | 2025-04-23 04:08:52+00:00
Products are often cheap enough that the labor costs are too high compared to getting a new unit. It would generally work for appliances that are built into a house or hard to transport because then the relative cost would be offset by the cost of labor to remove and install a replacement.

For example, people generally wouldn’t do this for a TV when they can get a decent replacement for $300 new.
by franciscop | 2025-04-23 04:09:16+00:00
Oh that's a great point/addition, thanks! The voltage already seems to be good. Everything seemed to work without even the resistor, just added the smaller resistor I had just in case and because I understand an LED in series with a power supply is a very bad idea, even if "it works" (wanted to be on the safe side). So is there something like a purely current protector that doesn't change the voltage much?
by synapsomorphy | 2025-04-23 04:10:22+00:00
This is somewhat disingenuous IMO. Language models do NOT explicitly tag parts of speech, or construct grammatical trees of relationships between words [1].

It also feels like motivated reasoning to make them seem dumb because in reality we mostly have no clue what algorithms are running inside LLMs.

> When you or I say "dog", we might recall the feeling of fur, the sound of barking [..] But when a model sees "dog", it sees a vector of numbers

when o3 or Gemini sees "dog", it might recall the feeling of fur, the sound of barking [..] But when a human says "dog", it sees electrical impulses in neurons

The stochastic parrot argument has been had a million times over and this doesn't feel like a substantial contribution. If you think vectors of numbers can never be true meaning then that means either (a) no amount of silicon can ever make a perfect simulation of a human brain, or (b) a perfectly simulated brain would not actually think or feel. Both seem very unlikely to me.

There are much better resources out there if you want to learn our best idea of what algorithms go on inside LLMs [2][3], it's a whole field called mechanistic interpretability, and it's way, way, way more complicated than tagging parts of speech.

[1] Maybe attention learns something like this, but it's doing a whole lot more than just that.

[2] https://transformer-circuits.pub/2025/attribution-graphs/bio...

[3] https://transformer-circuits.pub/2022/toy_model/index.html

P.S. The explainer has em dashes aplenty. I strongly prefer to see disclaimers (even if it's a losing battle) when LLMs are used heavily for writing especially for more technical topics like this.