MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by ty6853 | 2025-04-11 14:15:38+00:00
And 0% of them signed the constitution, declaration of independence, or any of the fictions which authorize their government. Being forced to pick between a couple assholes and then being damned for it can be really rich (oh yes you can vote 3rd party like me -- then everyone tells you how dumb you are for wasting your vote). The federal government and executive keeps gaining more and more power via judicial branch sanctioned scope creep. I have serious reservations that you can vote your way out of that, but it is driving the ever higher stakes people see in the presidential election.
by gruez | 2025-04-11 14:15:52+00:00
>Altogether, Bernie was the compromise candidate

Maybe if your politics are far left, but nationwide polling showed that he was consistently trailing Clinton. Even diehard Bernie supporters would admit he was left of Clinton, and considering that there are Republican candidates as well, it's laughable to claim he was a "compromise" candidate.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationwide_opinion_polling_for...
by the_arun | 2025-04-11 14:15:57+00:00
In the example used, I don't think strength (speed) is the same trait causing weakness (overlooking).

Collaborative development might have minimized the risk of the production issue.

* Design is not reviewed by other team members

* Coding is not reviewed by other team members

* Not proper automated testing (if it was a regression issue)

* Finally, speed with accuracy is what we need to focus on, while training/practicing ourselves. This comes with experience.

So it is a minor tweak we need to make.
by bluGill | 2025-04-11 14:16:06+00:00
What I don't like about the line is it only applies when there is a non-horse option. No amount of effort in 1600 would have resulted in either a bicycle or an automobile - there were too many needed things not available. In 1600 most people wouldn't have wanted a faster horse - sure they knew what a horse was but they couldn't afford to feed it and so they were not interested - a car is cheaper than a horse for nearly all uses.
by Amezarak | 2025-04-11 14:16:25+00:00
A lot of Americans thought the WTO was a disaster for America. There were violent protests over it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1999_Seattle_WTO_protests

I think this is the root of the disconnect. A lot of people say "wait, Americans wanted X because it's a useful tool for projecting American power" - whether X is the petrodollar, the WTO, free trade, whatever. But largely it was one segment of Americans that wanted and benefited from it.
by jMyles | 2025-04-11 14:17:01+00:00
> What's the difference between that which optimized for what you call "engagement" and what the average user wants?

People want joy, education, entertainment, etc. from watching a video.

But there may be other ways of appealing to people (addiction, insecurity, base stimulation) which boost engagement but which do not give users what they want.

Obviously on even slightly longer time scales, users will gravitate toward services that do not trade their health for engagement, but equally obvious is that many of today's apps are not optimizing for long time scales.
by barryhennessy | 2025-04-11 14:17:12+00:00
"My calendar is a true nightmare."

Check

"calendar systems suck. All of them."

Double check

"I’m trying to break off of big tech as much as I can"

I wish I could check this more ...

I've had similar needs/desires/gripes with my calendars and the terrible state of calendaring apps for a while. So thank you for scratching your own itch and sharing it with us.

I'm curious when you say that "[CalDAV] is an area begging for disruption". Can you enlighten us as to what your wishlist could be for (a) better protocol/systems/ecosystem might be? (a rant about your pain points might work too).

Thanks again!
by claytonjy | 2025-04-11 14:17:21+00:00
Not OP, but i think python is very far above R for engineering stuff. I built my early career on R and ran R user groups. R is great for one-off analyses, or low-volume controlled repetition like running the same report with new inputs.

For engineering stuff i want strong static analysis (type hints, pydantic, mypy), observability (logfire, structlog), and support (can i upload a package to my cloud package registry?).

For ML stuff, i want the libraries everyone else uses (pytorch, huggingface) because popularity brings a lot of development and documentation and obscure github issues the R clones lack.

Userbase matters. In R, hardly any users are doing any engineering; most R code only needs to run successfully one time. The ecosystem reflects that. The python-based ML world has the same problem, but the broader sea of python engineers helps counterbalance.
by Kye | 2025-04-11 14:18:14+00:00
I had to accept after almost 10 years that Mastodon and the broader AP fediverse were never going to suit me. Bluesky came along with a reminder of all the stuff I missed from Twitter with an organization and developer community that actually listens. The potential is there, and so far the devs haven't given me any reason to doubt they want to develop toward creating a credible exit[0].

AP is effectively centralized. The way art all but vanished from my timelines when mastodon.art's admin decided the server I was on was full of and run by evil racists[1] really hammered that point home. Everyone has to test for Mastodon's quirks to interoperate.

[0] https://whtwnd.com/bnewbold.net/3lbvbtqrg5t2t

[1] Spoiler: it's not
by K0balt | 2025-04-11 14:18:27+00:00
This has been a running joke in several projects I have been involved in, each time, apparently independently evolved. I never bring it up, but I am amused each time it appears out of the zeitgeist. It’s actually the best Kind of ironic humor, the kind that exposes a truth and a lie at the same time, with just enough political incorrectness to get traction.

I can’t even count the number of of times I have shut down “AI” projects where the actual plan was to use a labor pool to simulate AI, in order to create the training data to replace the humans with AI. Don’t get me wrong, it’s not a terrible idea for some cases, but you can’t just come straight out of the gate with fraud. Well, I mean, you could. But. Maybe you shouldn’t.
by jmholla | 2025-04-11 14:18:47+00:00
I decided to do a bit more testing to make sure that the newline in the script wasn't causing the kernel to do anything different. What I noticed is the output of strace is identical between the different variations of the strace invocation, with one difference, with a new line, there's an extra read call, but that's just for the shell to see what's left to run.

I guess my next step is to look at the kernel source itself. I'll probably end up doing that in a bit.
by lolinder | 2025-04-11 14:18:54+00:00
This isn't like most of the trite management tidbits you're comparing it to. All they're really observing is that there are no such things as "strengths" and "weaknesses" in the absence of context—there are only traits, and those traits may be useful, neutral, or counterproductive depending on the situation.

This principle shouldn't really be controversial because it's basically a law of nature. It's why small mammals took over from large reptiles after the asteroid hit. It's why New Zealand's flightless birds thrived until the introduction of the cat. Enormous size and cold bloodedness were an advantage until the climate changed. There was no need to waste energy on wings when there was no predator to eat you. Nature doesn't have a concept of strengths and weaknesses, nature has a concept of fittedness for a given environment, and we see the same thing with individual humans.
by mytailorisrich | 2025-04-11 14:19:28+00:00
Exchange rates change all the time. You can't ask to renegotiate weekly because the exchange rate has changed by a few percentage points, and you need to accept that the company will probably not care (until perhaps you have worked there long enough and they want to keep you). Would you be happy if they tried to renegotiate if the exchange rate went the other way?

IMHO, when you look for work like this and assess an offer you need to ask yourself how much the exchange rate would need to change for you to quit, how likely it is to happen, and how to plan and prepare for it. You should also perhaps assess whether the exchange rate is currently on the "low" or "high" side. But, again, you need to accept +/-10% as unavoidable over any given year.
by xnx | 2025-04-11 14:19:46+00:00
So far the largest applications I've seen of AI avatars are deepfake-ish Musk videos on YouTube trying to scam people with some shitcoin, and pornography (as always).

> We expect this space will give rise to multiple billion-dollar companies,

The most miraculous thing about this wave of AI is how democratized it is and how resistant it has been to anyone making money of it.
by lproven | 2025-04-11 14:19:50+00:00
> Europe it's Androidlandia, that's it.

I reject all your generalisations.

I'm an Irish citizen who until 2023 lived in Brno then Prague. Since I moved to the Isle of Man I've travelled and worked in Latvia, the Netherlands, Spain, Germany, Belgium, Czechia, Austria, England, Ireland, and Scotland, from memory. While I lived in Czechia I routinely travelled in all the countries it borders.

I have seen more iPhones in use than any single make of Android, and more iPads than all other forms of tablet put together. MS Surface tablets are #2 and outnumber all Android tablets put together. I am typing on a work-provided MacBook Air and my boss also uses MacBooks, and I think the majority of the company works on them, but we stopped having a central office years ago so my sampling is very ad hoc.

At both the enterprise Linux vendors where I've been a paid full-time member of staff, most managers and marketing people use MacBooks. (IMHO this is a damning indictment of desktop Linux but that's incidental.)

My own direct observations in the last decade refute your claims. I can't give you numbers but let's put it this way: the majority of the guests I invited to my wedding in 2023 I had to use Apple Messages from my iMac to contact, because they're not on any of the systems I use: Whatsapp, Signal, or Telegram.

Your experience is NOT representative.
by ebiester | 2025-04-11 14:20:08+00:00
I would take that bet. First, government office workers have a higher bar to entry. While I've heard criticism of them being myopic, it was rarely that they were lacking intelligence.

Deloitte consultants have a much wider variance. They too are capped on how much they can be paid, but they do not get the benefits of government service (e.g. pensions.) They are shuffled from subcontractor to subcontractor and the project managers are more obsessed with extracting more money from the department than finishing the project. The incentives are so misaligned as to be comical.
by dswalter | 2025-04-11 14:22:24+00:00
There's a fundamental reality that shapes both Netflix and Spotify's trajectory: content licensing. 2012 Netflix had access to vastly more of everyone else's library, so it was closer to an indexed search of what was available that one could watch and then getting that video onto your screen. Over time, other companies understood that they were underpricing their content and Netflix was reaping the benefits. Once external forces adjusted, the TV/film bidding wars began. Today, netflix doesn't have nearly as much content as they used to have.

That risk (losing all content and facing extinction) is what pushed Netflix in the direction of being a content-producer, rather than a content aggregator. I agree with everyone's points on the influence of the median user in diluting the quality of the content Netflix produces, but that's not the only forced that pushed us here. Spotify faced a similar crossroads and decided to broaden beyond music once they started losing bidding wars for licensing.

Being a faster horse wasn't an option available to either Netflix or Spotify; there is no path for a 'better 2012 version of netflix or spotify' in 2025. They each had to change species or die, and they chose to keep living.
by ceejayoz | 2025-04-11 14:22:48+00:00
His attorney is being correct. If he completed that program, the charge is gone and he has a clean record.

Taking a diversion plea deal, if offered, is a sensible choice, even if you're not guilty. It's substantially lower risk than fighting the charges.

(I'm also not sure which article you're quoting, but that line isn't in this one.)
by entrepy123 | 2025-04-11 14:22:48+00:00
From TFA:

> Can’t you just generate an image of a face, animate it, and add a voiceover? Not quite. The challenge isn’t just nailing the lip sync — it’s making facial expressions and body language move in tandem. It would be weird if your mouth opened in surprise, but your cheeks and chin didn’t budge!

Starting here:

- "generate an image of a face, animate it, and add a voiceover?"

Tried this at [0]. Here's an example visual output:

- https://visualmic.com/example-animation-4.gif

Judge for yourself. You can see the mouth and eyebrows move in response to voice volume, and the eyes shift and blink according to settings. But no cheek movement, no head tilt, and no face shape change.

I think TFA is sort of right.

I'm not sure that face cap and AI are 100% needed, and most of the tools for making great VR models seem either pretty complicated or sort of privacy invading. But, better translating voice input into face changes does seem sort of needed.

There's "virtual Youtuber" (vtuber) software too, but that too seems some combination of complicated/clunky, resource intensive, and/or in signup-required land. [EDIT: Surely, there is a good front end at OpenLive3D [1], but making the .VRM model for it, e.g., with VRoid Studio [2] is where things seem start to get a little more time/energy-intensive.]

I'm not against pseudonymous avatars, but is there a third path? It should be easy and open, no? Gonna have to trawl through the suggestions of a16z on this one.

[0] https://visualmic.com [1] https://openlive3d.com [2] https://vroid.com/en/studio
by bbor | 2025-04-11 14:23:28+00:00
Really great, succinct way to make this point. Here's an NGRAM of mentions of these brands in the English Fiction corpus, 1860-2025 -- Ferrari dominates until ~1970, when Porsche gains dominance. Obviously, Koenigsegg is barely on the graph at all.

P.S. I think it's telling that Porsche wasn't mentioned almost at all in English until the mid 1950s, given their role in the war!

https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Ferrari%2CLamb...
by at_a_remove | 2025-04-11 14:23:38+00:00
A shame, I used to use cgi all the time, back when I did web stuff. I wouldn't know what to do now, especially on IIS. Never did understand why I ought to want or need WSGI, other than I "ought to." Nor did I see how I was supposed to code against it, so I simply did cgi. It never raised a problem for me.
by gruez | 2025-04-11 14:23:44+00:00
>as the case was dismissed and expunged.

Apparently that was only because he completed a (court mandated?) rehab program? I guess that's technically not a conviction, but not the same as innocent, or even a "case dropped" (in the sense most people would expect).

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43654102
Show HN: Axis New Internal Combustion Tech Matches H2 Fuel Cell Efficiency
by axismotorcorp | 2025-04-11 14:24:10+00:00
2035 clean air regulations are fast approaching, and putting fossil fueled ICE's on the line, We need a replacement engine (that is viable to work with hydrogen at scale). Axis Motors USA is building this - to match hydrogen fuel cell efficiency @ 60% Thermal Efficiency and (50% Less hydrogen fuel consumption). This is a game changer for the global power industry!
by shermantanktop | 2025-04-11 14:24:16+00:00
Capturing the prompt is probably a good idea. But if I think about the goal of "reproducible builds" and "supply chain security," the use of LLMs in a vibe-coding mode looks like a step backward.

Ultimately the code needs to stand alone, but if you discover that a specific version of an LLM produced vulnerable code, you have no recourse but to try again and read the generated code more carefully. And reading code carefully is the opposite of vibe-coding.
Ask HN: What is the process for disclosing systemic level vulnerabilities?
by please_help_lol | 2025-04-11 14:24:17+00:00
Hello.

I am not a security researcher.

I uncovered an attack vector that I need guidance to disclose in an ethical and legal way.

The attack vector is not within my code. I see HackerOne disclosure as one route - https://docs.hackerone.com/en/articles/8517457-disclosure

If the path is not particular to any specific code package and is more related to supply chain attacks, then where does one go?
by toomuchtodo | 2025-04-11 14:24:46+00:00
I am not here to talk you out of your mental model around the cult of Elon. His companies have received almost $40B in various forms of government support, those are the facts. He is a skilled operator, able to whip teams of engineers to success and distort reality persuasively to customers and investors alike, but his ventures would not have survived without the government support he’s received.
by asdfgjkl | 2025-04-11 14:24:50+00:00
So it's another case of "let's make a solution for nonexisting problem" in the world of AI?

We all hear promises of how AI will save the world and bring about technological innovation and solutions for hard problems, and what we get is replacement for a job that can be done much cheaper by a human being.

I am getting major crypto vibes here, promises of greatness and bringing nothing but unnecessary fluff.
by ragnese | 2025-04-11 14:25:40+00:00
> The issue I think you're outlining is whether someone builds because they believe in their product and its value or if they are profiteers charading as believers.

I do agree with your overall criticism of short-sightedness and the short term incentives of VC and the stock market, etc.

But the people involved are not quite as binary as you lay out in the quote above. You can't discount the group of people who really do start out as true believers and who become seduced/deceived by VCs. Some of these VC types are real vultures. They'll convince the founder that the best way to share their vision or product with the most people and do the most good for the world is to let the VC guys use their capital to scale up and expand the reach of the product, etc. The money surely helps to lower one's skepticism/cynicism, but I can imagine that it must be very hard to say no to getting your dream project out to millions of people.
by red_admiral | 2025-04-11 14:25:40+00:00
I get your point but I think the browser analogy is wrong.

IE had something like 90% market share back in the day because it was bundled with the OS and cost $0.

Chrome ate everyone's lunch because everyone was using google to search for stuff, and they could advertise their browser on their home page or together with their search results. They also took out ads, in some countries, on billboards, in newspapers and even in cinemas.

I'm sure technical people talking to their families had a small effect (though wouldn't they recommend firefox, because FOSS?), but I think that pales in comparison to google being able to advertise chrome on their search page.
by beloch | 2025-04-11 14:25:46+00:00
To simplify:

1. Innovate.

2. Exploit.

You start by innovating a "fast horse". This gains you early adopters who pull in a larger audience. A horse can only be so fast, so continued innovation might lead to something more like a car. This will only cause you to bleed users. Stick to the horse.

Instead of continuing to innovate endlessly, you switch to exploitation. Fire the visionaries. They're just a waste of payroll. Bring in people who can squeeze every last dime out of your user base.

-----------------------

The above isn't anything new. However, it's clear that some companies are better at maintaining quality while exploiting. Are they doing something different, or is it just that their customers have to choose them repeatedly? e.g. Most people don't sign up with one car company for life. They'll buy several cars over their life and that's a choice that the car company must win each time. Meanwhile, people sign up for Netflix or Spotify and stay subbed. They don't look at the alternatives every few years. Porsche needs to keep up with the latest and fastest horses to continue exploiting their reputation, while Netflix can focus purely on making more money from their users. A faster horse may come along, but Netflix doesn't break down and need to be replaced.
by mathgeek | 2025-04-11 14:26:01+00:00
This is a big weakness of many, many folks. Knowing when to work hard(er) and when to take time to recover is important in pursuits both mental and physical. You see it all the time in sports(e.g. overtraining) and careers (e.g. the father who spends his nights at work and misses his kids' events).
by vintagedave | 2025-04-11 14:26:03+00:00
Thing is, he’s right. We learn from all input and a great deal of it is copyrighted — every book or movie we’ve ever seen.

If I tell you something I learned from a copyrighted book, I am not doing something illegal.

If I produce a copy of someone else’s output and state it’s my own, I am. That’s plagiarism. And I think this is the best way to view AIs that create artworks “in the style of” etc — as plagiarism for output, not copyright violation for input.

I, and I am the author of several things including proprietary software (published, sold, even acquired!) and a novel I hope to publish soon, increasingly think copyright is an evil. I like getting income from what I make but I don’t believe in stopping people accessing what I create. Using it to restrict learning absolutely is an evil. And an AI uses it to learn.
by palmotea | 2025-04-11 14:26:50+00:00
> Elections have consequences. Although it's decidedly unfair, it would seem, when some of those consequences fall on those who don't even get a vote.

That sentiment sounds nice, but it's kinda messed up: it implies non-citizens should have more rights and privileges than citizens (i.e. be insulated from the consequences of elections). It's like, if someone loans you their car, insisting they shouldn't be able to ask for it back because you didn't have say in the decision.

Ultimately, if you're actually for democracy, you have to be fine with policy changing in whatever way the electorate decides it should change.
by lproven | 2025-04-11 14:26:51+00:00
Because it's an updated version of Prof Wirth's original in-house project from ETH, once an inexpensive FPGA became viable.

I wrote about it a decade ago:

https://www.theregister.com/2015/12/02/pi_versus_oberton/

That's one source reflecting one particular project, which Prof Wirth came out of retirement to help with. It is not representative of the broader use and adoption of Oberon at all. Once there was commodity 32-bit hardware, Oberon researchers adopted it with enthusiasm and it has at various times run on most 32-bit CPUs.

These days, the work I'm aware of is mostly on x86, though. For example, this commercial offshoot, Blackbox Component Pascal:

https://blackboxframework.org/
by vladvasiliu | 2025-04-11 14:27:33+00:00
Don't they make like 5 of those, and for absurdly high prices?

Ferraris, Porsches and similar are somewhat attainable, which, I think, helps with their being symbols, since most people have already actually seen them and know they're real. A Koenigsegg is as good as a story. Hell, I live in Paris and I've never actually seen one. Porches and Ferraris? They're seemingly everywhere.
by danso | 2025-04-11 14:27:36+00:00
> * Steve Jobs was one of these people. A clever marketing guy who relied on others for technical heavy lifting. I suggest going back and re-watching some of his presentations, like the unveiling of the iPhone. Every word he said was meticulously planned and very rehearsed.*

Before Apple entered its iPod era, Jobs could do a reasonable job of taking questions from a technical audience

https://youtu.be/yQ16_YxLbB8?si=GK5NvbyND1xriiYm