MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by jaxtracks | 2025-04-15 15:37:55+00:00
I agree that availing yourself of other people's charity for the sake of gaining a novel experience is gross if they have no way to decline or you're misrepresenting your circumstances. I think you've got a poorly adjusted take on the level of imposition happening in the situations described here though.

When I thumb a ride with a boat over my shoulder, nobody has to stop, and I'm sure nobody feels too bad for the dummy who might have to walk all afternoon because he decided to huck a river without a shuttle plan. When the author crashes at a fire-house, my hunch is the chief isn't worried that if he declines then the guy who's been camping for most of his trip anyway is going to freeze to death. Maybe he's just stoked to do someone a solid and chitchat with a traveler on a slow night. These are not 'CEO at a foodbank' type situations.

If I go on a mission to yoink a boater out of a gnarly river, I never hear anyone on my S&R crew worrying over whether the subject could have afforded a guided trip instead. We're just happy to help, and hope they learn from the experience. I think people legitimately enjoy helping eachother out more than you assume here, and are probably less concerned with economic status of the recipient than you.

> Ironically this effort to relate to other real live humans with normal incomes is only possible by indulging in the ultimate luxury, which is taking major time off of work rather than being stuck working a shit job.

So what do you advocate for here? Growing the increasing cultural isolation between economic classes because those lucky enough to afford time off work should be so concerned with potentially imposing that they shamefully avoid putting themselves in situations where they could benefit from the help of someone less well off?

Wealth inequality is a huge problem, and I'm excusing the level of salt in your comment because I agree with your general theme that exploitation of that dynamic is bad. But it feels like you're attacking a harmless treatment because you're upset the disease exists in the first place.
by sightbroke | 2025-04-15 15:38:06+00:00
I am by no means an export on manufacturing, nor international trade, economics, or virtually anything relevant to manufacturing. Just a layman here.

Observationally I fear there is a lack of nuance in discussing "bringing back manufacturing" (really re-expanding) to the U.S.

I fear the lack of nuance is due to bias based on not liking the guy in the red tie or the other guy that's in a blue tie so there's just blinders about whether or not a particular policy will achieve a particular stated goal.

The next thing I see is it just lumping manufacturing all into one bucket.

Take manufacturing smartphones. Because the U.S. doesn't assemble iPhones the U.S. appears to be bad at manufacturing? No, I think it's just not good at assembling iPhones.

Just looking at numbers, sure the U.S. steel production is dwarfed by China but globally it's still a major producer. And there's no discussion of quality.

Look at oil & gas. I'm pretty sure the U.S. both produces the raw material and refined product at a significant amount globally.

Plastic manufacturing. I toured a bottle manufacturing plant last summer. It's primary a customer was Limited Brands (Victoria Secret)

It built molds. It upgraded factory equipment roughly every 8 years (increasing production & reducing labor costs). Why was it able to manufacturer bottles in the U.S. even it's selling at a higher price? Because it's primary customer was essentially down the street. That is, apparently the cost to not import across the globe more than offset the cost to manufacture here.

I understand that's just an example and I'm trusting the information from that company was reliable.

But first I think we need to be honest about how much manufacturing is here and what type. Then discuss which policies are likely to achieve goals we may have in mind.

I think there's merit to manufacturing semiconductors and batteries here. But we need to also be aware that while manufacturing may bring jobs, an increasing amount of labor will be automated.
by captn3m0 | 2025-04-15 15:38:26+00:00
This is great news. This would blow a hole in two interesting places where leaf-level certificate pinning is relied upon:

1. mobile apps.

2. enterprise APIs. I dealt with lots of companies that would pin the certs without informing us, and then complain when we'd rotate the cert. A 47-day window would force them to rotate their pins automatically, making it even worse of a security theater. Or hopefully, they switch rightly to CAA.
by alright2565 | 2025-04-15 15:38:27+00:00
It would be really easy. I'm not sure why the author has gone through so much effort to hide what filter this is, but I'm assuming J2 is the blower power output and J3 is touchpad controls.

I've done exactly this on my own air filter, and it's about 200 lines of config. The hardest part is mapping binary outputs to a percentage:

switch: - platform: gpio pin: GPIO21 id: fan_low interlock_wait_time: 250ms interlock: &interlock_group [fan_low, fan_mid, fan_high, fan_turbo] - platform: gpio pin: GPIO25 id: fan_mid interlock_wait_time: 250ms interlock: *interlock_group - platform: gpio pin: GPIO22 id: fan_high interlock_wait_time: 250ms interlock: *interlock_group - platform: gpio pin: GPIO17 id: fan_turbo interlock_wait_time: 250ms interlock: *interlock_group output: - platform: template id: fan_speed_output type: float write_action: - lambda: |- id(fan_low).turn_off(); id(fan_mid).turn_off(); id(fan_high).turn_off(); id(fan_turbo).turn_off(); auto light = ((AddressableLight*)id(status_light).get_output()); for (int i = 6; i <= 9; i++) { light->get(i).set(Color::BLACK); } if (state < 0.24) { } else if (state < 0.26) { id(fan_low).turn_on(); light->get(6).set(Color(255,0,0,0)); } else if (state < 0.51) { id(fan_mid).turn_on(); light->get(7).set(Color(255,0,0,0)); } else if (state < 0.76) { id(fan_high).turn_on(); light->get(8).set(Color(255,0,0,0)); } else { id(fan_turbo).turn_on(); light->get(9).set(Color(255,0,0,0)); } light->schedule_show(); fan: - platform: speed name: "Filter Speed" output: fan_speed_output speed_count: 4 id: my_fan
by pmarreck | 2025-04-15 15:38:27+00:00
I was mainly devils'-advocating, up until this guy.

With this guy, I can find no fault. If you watch his 60 Minutes interview, it seems heartfelt and authentic. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=grj328-hlhA Plus, if he was born Palestinian and is now a Buddhist, that means that he willingly chose to endure the risk of getting killed as an apostate of Islam.

Something must be done... at least in his case.
by alabastervlog | 2025-04-15 15:38:49+00:00
They'll likely try to give us a re-do of Covid inflation to juice unadjusted numbers, but without an actual external emergency to even sort-of justify it.

I'm wondering how closely banks' rates will follow the Fed, this time. I'm guessing less-so than usual, making the measures less effective than normal. Lowering rates even further to compensate may signal panic and incompetence (even more) to the markets, which will be... fun.
by throw0101b | 2025-04-15 15:39:07+00:00
getssl was written with a bit of a focus on this:

> Get certificates for remote servers - The tokens used to provide validation of domain ownership, and the certificates themselves can be automatically copied to remote servers (via ssh, sftp or ftp for tokens). The script doesn't need to run on the server itself. This can be useful if you don't have access to run such scripts on the server itself, e.g. if it's a shared server.

* https://github.com/srvrco/getssl
by gbraad | 2025-04-15 15:39:28+00:00
A while back I created a fallback for use from my dotfiles that can be used from the command line: https://github.com/gbraad-dotfiles/upstream/blob/02deb3ef922... using zsh, openssl and xxd

This is not the first attempt I made. That was about 11 years ago with https://github.com/gbraad-apps/gauth using JavaScript as an application that would work on a Nokia Symbian/Maemo phone and as a webapp.
by cruffle_duffle | 2025-04-15 15:39:33+00:00
"At least 25% of the time I have to hit the stop button and go back to a checkpoint because the automatic lawnmower has started driving through the flowerbed again."

I absolutely love this analogy! And yes 25% seems right. Interestingly in like 50% of those cases all the models get into the same loop.
by bayindirh | 2025-04-15 15:39:50+00:00
For extremely sensitive systems, I think a more logical endgame is 30 minutes or so. 30 seconds is practically continuous generation.

An semi-distributed (intercity) Kubernetes cluster can reasonably change its certificate chain every week, but it needs an HSM if it's done internally.

Otherwise, for a website, once or twice a year makes sense if you don't store anything snatch-worthy.
by KomradeKeeks | 2025-04-15 15:39:59+00:00
> you wouldn't expect someone who's an assistant manager at McDonald's to finish their law degree and start a new job as senior partner at the law firm

I think the metaphor's a little off (I have programming experience, and what'd be more apt is a McDonald's corporate ops manager moving into in-house legal after getting law degree + passing the bar), but I get what you meant!

If you were in a similar position, how would you build a portfolio that shows you have programming skills, and aren't just good at prompting?
by kelseyfrog | 2025-04-15 15:40:23+00:00
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/pQGFeKvjydztpgnsY/occupation...

https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/MnFqyPLqbiKL8nSR7/my-experie...

https://medium.com/@zoecurzi/my-experience-with-leverage-res...

https://maxread.substack.com/p/the-zizians-and-the-rationali...

The last link and especially the second half expands from examining the latest example into the broader landscape of Rationalist cultism.
by jvanderbot | 2025-04-15 15:40:41+00:00
One thing I've found helpful is to coax them to imagine dems in charge. You can't outright mention dems in charge, because they will (mostly correctly) point out that dems _have_ been in charge of our institutions for a long time.

You have to understand their position: They don't feel in danger. They feel in power - the opposite of danger. Asking them to perceive danger is asking them to give up their feeling of power - tantamount to admitting everything they voted for is void.

But the path I found was to tease out that expansion of powers are permanent, making any changes from expansion of powers temporary. And we don't want temporary positive changes, do we? With all this legislative power, couldn't we just, you know, pass laws?

I've also come to accept that we should (for the sake of progress past issues) just:

* build the border wall, but suddenly nobody seems interested - what gives?

* slash costs to balance the budget, but suddenly nobody seems interested, what gives?

etc

The problem with true discussion of these issues is that you find yourself mostly in agreement with each other's viewpoint (at least subject to their "axioms"), and have to mellow out a bit. You can't really stand still and say "Come over here" all the time.
by brulard | 2025-04-15 15:40:50+00:00
In SW development you need to make compromises. You can not have all of: quality, performance, memory/cpu/disk efficiency, security, development speed, low effort, cross-platform app, accessibility, all the business features, etc. Which corners would you cut? You mention native tech but you seem to ignore the enormous tax in development time/knowledge, etc. So let's say you aim for the best UX. Are you ready to sacrifice business features, or any other aspect? I'm not advocating for crappy UI/UX, but I would rather use an electron app that has all the features I need, than native app that doesn't.
by PaulKeeble | 2025-04-15 15:40:50+00:00
They saw extra profit $ and didn't consider the consequences. I suspect there was a bit of racism involved where they thought the Chinese would never learn to go from manufacturer to designing products nor master the entire pipeline and end up competing with them in the domestic market. China obviously did because they funded engineering education heavily and learnt all they needed to and surpassed the companies they built for some time ago.
by 9rx | 2025-04-15 15:40:57+00:00
> The whole point of an argument is exploring ideas and learning something new

Exactly. Which is why argumentation becomes boring once you are at the point where you feel there is nothing left that you can learn. Not only does it become boring, but it encroaches on the time you have to broach subjects you want to learn about, so there is great incentive to move on for that reason as well.

But when you are in a state where you still feel there is something left to learn, where you might drum up an argument to continue to learn and explore, you're not going to make a mind. That would be nonsensical.

So the idea of argument changing your mind isn't practical, even if theoretically possible. During argument, there is no mind to change. Once a mind is made, argument ceases (fake argument with ulterior motives aside).
by like_any_other | 2025-04-15 15:41:13+00:00
> Thing is, manufacturing in America is up.

I'm looking at the first chart, "Manufacturing Sector: Real Sectoral Output for All Workers" [1]. It grew until Q2 2000, when it was at 97.2. In Q4 2024 it was at 98.6. And let's not ignore how almost all leading semiconductor manufacturing (which are in and required for nearly everything) has moved to East Asia.

[1] https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/OUTMS
by ccleve | 2025-04-15 15:41:51+00:00
Oddly, I thought this discussion would be about actual toddlers.

There is a way to win an argument with a toddler. You find out what's bothering them, usually something emotional, and you validate it. "Yes! It's fun to stay up late! Yes! You don't want to eat your vegetables!" Once they feel heard, you've got a shot at getting them to do what you want.

That's a good way to win an argument with a non-toddler as well. Acknowledge that what they want is legitimate (if it is). Concede points of agreement. Talk about shared goals. Only then talk about a different path to the solution.
by tialaramex | 2025-04-15 15:41:58+00:00
I think that's still unit tests if that "standard MongoDB container" is actually hermetic.

It's pretty easy to make testing stuff like "We'll conjure into existence a loopback network server" hermetic and likewise for the Entity Framework trick where it runs tests against a SQLite db even though that's not how your real DB works, it's often good enough. Containers are something which could be hermetic, but I am dubious.
by maujun | 2025-04-15 15:42:03+00:00
I see, so the general idea is that there are certain people in the federal govt that really have a mission, and the mission opposes these inmates.

To the point that they are willing to collaborate across states to rotate them around.

Confidence and morality are the underlying feelings across this part of the govt then, I am guessing. As a processed, your only solution now is to hope you get placed in the right moral category. That is a risk the processor is confident enough to take.

Thank you for the links.
by chromanoid | 2025-04-15 15:42:12+00:00
I dunno. Self-hosting w/o automation was feasible. Now you have to automate. It will lead to a huge amount of link rot or at least something very similar. There will be solutions but setting up a page e2e gets more and more complicated. In the end you want a service provider who takes care of it. Maybe not the worst thing, but what kind of security issues are we talking about? There is still certificate revocation...
by jchw | 2025-04-15 15:42:40+00:00
I mean, we do TOFU for SSH server keys* and nobody really seems to bat an eye at that. Today if you want "insecure but encrypted" on the web the main way to go is self-signed which is both more annoying and less secure than TOFU for the same kind of use case. Admittedly, this is a little less concerning of an issue thanks to ACME providers. (But still annoying, especially for local development and intranet.)

*I mistakenly wrote "certificate" here initially. Sorry.
by Calinterman | 2025-04-15 15:42:50+00:00
Gamergate and Donald Trump was a 4-6 year period depending on where you put the needle. There were 10 years before it and now close to 5 years after it. The people who continue to hammer about it are just announcing that they don't understand the site and are complaining about ancient history. The most popular board right now is the video game generals board, and second place belongs to the regular video games board.
by zzrrt | 2025-04-15 15:42:55+00:00
> yes lots of cybersecurity experts were black hat hackers at one point

It makes some sense to hire a former blackhat to secure your computers, with appropriate supervision. It's a lot less reasonable to hire a former blackhat to get into your own computer and treasury systems to run audits. I could almost buy an argument like "If you have a legal right to get in but the door is locked, you hire a locksmith to crack the lock. So they needed hackers to take control of the systems away from obstructionists." But you would then send the locksmith home, not have them root through all the records in the building and decide who to fire.

> At one point Obama had then-VP Biden in charge of government efficiency efforts utilizing USDS to do it: literally the DOGE playbook with a different name, except the person in charge now actively wants to have fewer federal employees.

Could you provide more information on Biden's nominal assignment, and what exactly he was supposed to make more efficient? I couldn't find it by Googling, as everything is about DOGE now.

Anyway, on USDS in general. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Digital_Service:

> It provides consultation services to federal agencies on information technology. The agency's 2014 mandate was to improve and simplify digital service, and to improve federal websites.[7][8][9] The mission of the agency is to "deliver better government services to the American people through technology and design."

I could agree that these could be termed "efficiency", but clearly they are very different from the goals of DOGE. USDS had a 2016 value statement that included "Hire and empower great people." So yeah, they didn't reduce the government headcount, as it wasn't their goal and that's not the only way to deliver "efficiency" or government improvement.

The Obama origins are a historical footnote and possibly done this way by Trump for legal expediency reasons. But USDS and DOGE have basically nothing else in common. Most of the USDS staff were fired, their mission statement is replaced. You're holding USDS accountable to DOGE's goals, when USDS didn't share those goals. In 2024 USDS reported "$285 million in projected estimated savings over five years in infrastructure expenses for the Social Security Administration" according to Wikipedia, so it's not like they were allergic to saving money, they just didn't do it by axing the bureaucracy.

You can think DOGE is better or more effective than USDS if you want, but it's partisan distraction to claim they are nominally doing the same work.

Here's some more information about the differences between the original USDS and DOGE: https://www.snopes.com/news/2025/03/05/trump-doge-obama/
by eesmith | 2025-04-15 15:43:05+00:00
Based on the linked-to page, no:

47 days might seem like an arbitrary number, but it’s a simple cascade: * 200 days = 6 maximal month (184 days) + 1/2 30-day month (15 days) + 1 day wiggle room * 100 days = 3 maximal month (92 days) + ~1/4 30-day month (7 days) + 1 day wiggle room * 47 days = 1 maximal month (31 days) + 1/2 30-day month (15 days) + 1 day wiggle room
by HelloMcFly | 2025-04-15 15:43:15+00:00
I agree with your examples of language dilution being harmful, but sorry I just don't agree with this one. I think we're seeing a smarter form of disappearance, one where we know who took them, we know where they end up, but there is a clear and - I think to most reasonable people - obvious bad faith attempt to place them outside of due process or monitoring for constitutionally compliant treatment.

> No. That’s disappearance. The CIA doesn’t comment on its renditions, much less argue them in an open court.

You didn't engage with the hypothetical and changed the situation since it's not representative of how things work today. One year ago, the current situation would have been similarly described. I don't think it was an unfair thought exercise given the circumstances.

> Challenged, not ignored. From what I can tell the administration is begrudgingly complying with the letter of the judges’ (and justices’) orders

I guess we'll see.

On this topic, I think reasonable people can disagree, which we clearly do. I think a smart administrative state would disappear people just like this, it feels like an evolution of KGB tactics that adds some documentation, but the outcome is precisely the same.
by 9283409232 | 2025-04-15 15:43:28+00:00
I don't know about that but I believe the EU and Canada have the opportunity to take advantage of this and incite a brain drain in the US. All of those talented grad students have to go somewhere and they will likely go to UBC, Waterloo, or University of Toronto. All of those entrepreneurs who are afraid for there safety in the US will go somewhere else. Canada and Europe should make strong moves for them.
by jcranmer | 2025-04-15 15:43:40+00:00
> People wigged out over non-reciprocal tariffs, where we tariff at 50% what they charge the US.

The "reciprocal" tariffs are based on not the tariff duties foreign countries imposed on US goods, but the trade deficit the US has with said foreign country. There's a lot of idiocy in the tariffs, but this was one of the loudest complaints people had with them.

> People wigged out at 10℅ flat rate tariffs. "Heard island penguins get charged 10%!)

Because the list of "countries" being charged made it clear that it wasn't being based on a list of countries as people understand them. Uninhabited islands and islands consisting only of US military bases being on the list were strong signs of the lack of competence in the planning for the tariffs.

And really, that's why people are complaining so hard: it is abundantly clear that tariffs are being rolled out in a botched manner by incompetent people for inane reasons, so whatever positive effect they might have is completely ruined and all of their negative effects are intensely amplified.
by Workaccount2 | 2025-04-15 15:43:55+00:00
If you don't think you would be able to fool the person that you have the same views as them, you probably will not be able to have a productive argument with them.

i.e. if you couldn't sit at the table with a bunch of (insert ideology) adherents and blend right in, you probably don't understand their views well enough to dissuade them from it.
by throw0101b | 2025-04-15 15:43:57+00:00
Justification:

> The ballot argues that shorter lifetimes are necessary for many reasons, the most prominent being this: The information in certificates is becoming steadily less trustworthy over time, a problem that can only be mitigated by frequently revalidating the information.

> The ballot also argues that the revocation system using CRLs and OCSP is unreliable. Indeed, browsers often ignore these features. The ballot has a long section on the failings of the certificate revocation system. Shorter lifetimes mitigate the effects of using potentially revoked certificates. In 2023, CA/B Forum took this philosophy to another level by approving short-lived certificates, which expire within 7 days, and which do not require CRL or OCSP support.

Personally I don't really buy this argument. I don't think the web sites that most people visit (especially highly-sensitive ones like for e-mail, financial stuff, a good portion of shopping) change or become "less trustworthy" that quickly.