MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by zy5a59 | 2025-04-21 11:41:15+00:00
I'm excited to introduce you to *NoTab*, a browser extension we've built to transform how you experience the web!

Ever found yourself with 100+ tabs open, frantically trying to find that one article you need? Or constantly switching between tabs to compare information? We've been there too, and that's why we created NoTab.

## What is NoTab?

NoTab lets you preview any link directly on your current page - no more tab-switching madness!

It can also let you search or translate the text in current page.

## Key Features: - *Link Preview:* Instantly view content from links without opening new tabs, helping you stay on task and reduce distractions. - *Customizable Preview Window:* Adjust the size and fix the position of the preview window for the optimal reading experience while scrolling. - *Simultaneous Previews:* Compare multiple links in current page. - *Quick Translation:* Translate the text in current page. - *Quick Search:* Search the text in current page.

## Who is this for?

NoTab is perfect for researchers, students, writers, news junkies, shoppers comparing products, or anyone who finds themselves drowning in browser tabs.

We're just getting started and would love your feedback! What features would you like to see next?

Try NoTab today!
by skywhopper | 2025-04-21 11:41:17+00:00
I don’t mind sharing my software with others, even folks who want to make a profit. Of course, that’s easy for me to say since I’ve only released a few small projects open source. But when I do, I make my projects fully public domain. I’m not interested in feeling any sense of obligation to those who try the software out, so I free them from any obligation to me as well.

That said, I fully support larger projects being GPL, which I think is a more reasonable license for projects that involve dozens or hundreds of contributors and are depended on by millions around the world. But the role of the MIT and Apache style licenses has always felt a little more confusing.
by asim | 2025-04-21 11:42:04+00:00
The best you could hope for in these situations is perhaps a job. It's not uncommon to see not just in open source but in business in general that the large player will try to extract business knowledge and reimplement themselves. The code isn't the value, it's the people maintaining it and the community or customers using it. I've seen it happen with Google and a real business also. So I think ultimately cooperation turns into coopetition where you're going to compete until some agreement can be reached. In a business case, Google fell flat on its face and acquired the company I was working at. In the case of open source I've raised seen it turn into an acquisition as we've seen the forks are really about code ownership for something they run as as managed services or use internally. They're rarely buying it for the people or community.
by Jensson | 2025-04-21 11:42:22+00:00
> Aren't humans themselves essentially human made?

Humans evolved, but yeah the definition can be a bit hard to understand since it is hard to separate things. That is why I brought up the artificial insemination example since it deals with this.

> Maybe a better definition would be non-human (or inorganic if we want to include intelligence like e.g. dolphins)?

We also have artificial lakes, they are inorganic but human made.
by Spooky23 | 2025-04-21 11:43:46+00:00
Catholics don’t generally adopt the anti-science stuff. Their dogma around life has some walls around some areas of medicine.

I know several priests who are scientists or teachers/professors.

Evangelicals have a simpler dogma where the individual minister or church has more sway (hence the joke about the man on a desert island with a hut, a church, and a church he doesn’t go to). It’s a more populist form of worship, which has ups and downs.
by latexr | 2025-04-21 11:43:47+00:00
I’m a fan of regular expressions, though I understand why many people wince at the sight. You should avoid showing them to a non-programmer who is interested in learning to code, because they’ll immediately fear programming is intractable.

Even as much as I like regex, I wouldn’t recommend this post. One reason is the code style is too close to regular text:

> a matches a single character, always lowercase a.

That sentence uses “a” three times, two of them as code and once as an indefinite article, but it’s not immediately obvious to eye. VoiceOver completely fumbles it, especially considering the sentence immediately after.

A more important reason against recommending the article is that I find a bunch of the arguments to be unhelpful. If you’re trying to convince people to give regular expressions a chance, telling them to ignore `.` and use `[^%]` is going to bite them. That’s not super common (important when trying to learn more from other sources) and even an experienced regexer must do a double take to figure out “is there a reason this specific character must not be matched?” Furthermore, no new learner is going to remember that four character incantation, and neither are they going to understand what’s happening when their code doesn’t work because there was a `%` in their text. People need to learn about `.` (possibly the most common character in regex) if only because they also need to learn to escape it and not ignore it when there is a literal period in the text. Don’t tell people to ignore repetition ranges either, they aren’t difficult to reason about and are certainly simpler to read than the same blob of intractable text multiple times.
by Xcelerate | 2025-04-21 11:44:58+00:00
If I had to guess, I would say that of the ones with more than a few states and symbols that do not halt (i.e. reach a static image configuration), modern mathematics (ZFC) probably cannot prove that fact for most of them. The Busy Beaver project managed it for all 5 state, 2 symbol machines on the empty tape, but IIRC they’re uncertain whether BB(6) is ZFC-provable. (Someone from that project correct me if I’m wrong.)

I find that fascinating. Small scale computation (exploring Turing machine behavior, cellular automata, etc.) is mostly considered a curiosity within the hobbyist realm at the moment, but I suspect that will change over time as we develop better and better tools to characterize computation.
by losvedir | 2025-04-21 11:44:58+00:00
Does anyone have any theories why his predecessor, Benedict, so shockingly resigned? (And then, according to this article, continued to live there, which was news to me).

The conventional wisdom is that Benedict was a hardline, conservative nut who had to resign for unknown reasons and was replaced by this well-loved, progressive guy. As seen in this thread, lots of people liked him and his philosophy, and his progressive take on things which always made the news, as he focused on the poor and traveled the world.

However, I've heard the conspiracy that Benedict was forced out, possibly related to his investigations into the child sex abuse scandal, maybe because he was finding important people involved. He was always very focused on the Church itself. And Francis was chosen, almost as a patsy, to end those investigations and instead be the friendly Pope out away from the Vatican.

I just always thought Benedict's resignation was surprising and there was something more to the story.
by ksec | 2025-04-21 11:45:24+00:00
>In the second half of 2026, Nvidia is promising to deliver the Vera Rubin NVL144, with a new Arm chip and a new GPU. The company has yet to disclose how much power it expects that rack to consume, but it will likely be higher, with Boyle stating that “there'll be lots of steps in between” the 120kW scale and 600kW. “We've got to meet our customers where they are today.”

>All of this brings the 'Kyber' rack to 600kW, beyond the limits of the vast majority of data centers today, especially if the racks are deployed at scale.

>He continues: "It's undeniable that the density will continue to increase. Will we get to 1MW exactly? I don't know, but the density will definitely go higher and higher because the compute will be so much more efficient when that happens.

1MW Rack? I just cant compute the density here. But I also cant wait to see it.

I finally understand what Jensen was saying about AI Factory. It isn't a Chip or a 4 to 8U Server Unit anymore. It is not just another 4Us Unit within Racks. They are more like Oxide, Rack as a unit designed from ground up.

I reached on google, and 1 MW can supply electricity to approximately 500 to 1,000 households. Absolutely insane number.
by cmrdporcupine | 2025-04-21 11:45:29+00:00
I think attitudes on license reflects on the whole a generational attitudes towards corporate use because the younger generation of software nerds grew up in epoch-boom-times.

During ZIRP-boom-times, having a successful popular open source project could be a ticket to kudos and a high paying job and a certain level of responsibility and satisfaction. BigCos spread the money around, and your job as a SWE ended up being gluing together a bunch of these open source pieces to solve corporate problems. And on the whole people felt like their corporate jobs were giving a fair deal, and a decent dividend for the open source work they were doing.

In that context why would you pick a license that your generous employer couldn't use?

The GPL and the free software movement is borne out of an earlier era, GenX and younger boomers who lived through seeing their hard work exploited and stolen from them. Or corporate entities that cut budgets, laid people off en masse, exploded in stock market crisis, etc and suddenly the good will was lost.

I think we'll see a bit of a resurgence in the GPL, as some people try to protect the work they've done.

(I do thnk the personality of Stallman himself has become a bit of a problem to be associated with)
by latexr | 2025-04-21 11:45:59+00:00
> unreadable once written (to me anyway). (…) there might be more inputs upon which it has unintended effects.

https://regex101.com can explain your regex back to you, and allows you to test it with more inputs.

Though I’m not trying to convince you to always use regular expressions, I agree with GP:

> Obviously regexes aren't the right tool for every job, and they can certainly be done poorly; but in the right place at the right time they're the simplest, most robust, easiest to understand solution to the problem.
by gwd | 2025-04-21 11:46:28+00:00
I initially had the same reaction to the MIT license; but it sort of looks like the GPL (or AGPL) wouldn't have really prevented this behavior. Microsoft (it sounds like) is making the code available; they've just extended and renamed the project. They could have done exactly the same thing (fork, rename, release under the same license), with the same effects he's complaining about (free-loading the consulting time, confusing the community) if he'd made it AGPL.

I mean, consider an alternate timeline. It's clear MS had their own, strong vision for the project, that overlapped with but wasn't identical to his. Is it actually that much more considerate to show up with two dozen new developers suddenly flooding a single-maintainer project with pull requests, some of which completely restructure the code and re-orient it towards a new vision that the original maintainer might not want?

Either the maintainer is now doing loads of unpaid labor for MS, and is the bottleneck; or he ends up having to step back and let the new MS developers bulldoze the project and take it over anyway.

What would have been a better approach?
by Jensson | 2025-04-21 11:46:46+00:00
> Put another way, I’m not a strong dev but good LLMs can write lots of code with less bugs than me!

But the AI still can't replace you, it doesn't learn as it go and therefore fail to navigate long term tasks the way humans do. When a human writes a big program he learns how to write it as he writes it, these current AI cannot do that.
by Mawr | 2025-04-21 11:47:02+00:00
It's not as simple as "more features" == "closer to C++". Features are not equal to each other in terms of impact on language complexity.

t-strings don't interact with anything else in the language; they, as you yourself pointed out, could almost be an isolated library. That makes them low impact.

This is also true syntactically; they're just another type of string, denoted by "t" instead of "f". That's easy to fit into one's existing model of the language.

Moreover, even semantically, from the point of view of most language users, they are equivalent to f-strings in every way, so there's nothing to learn, really. It's only the library writers who need to learn about them.

Then we have to consider the upsides - the potential to eliminate SQL and HTML injection attacks. The value/cost is so high the feature a no-brainer.
by kstrauser | 2025-04-21 11:47:13+00:00
I released a fun personal project under GPLv3 and the first filed issue was someone saying I should change the license to something friendlier to business interests.

Hell no. If they want to profit off my work, pay me. This is something I'm doing for fun, on my own terms. It’s Free for anyone to use as they want, so long as they keep it Free, too.
by znpy | 2025-04-21 11:47:23+00:00
To add some missing context: the MIT license is so small I can embed it into this post.

Here it is:

Copyright (c) <year> <copyright holders> Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy of this software and associated documentation files (the "Software"), to deal in the Software without restriction, including without limitation the rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the Software is furnished to do so, subject to the following conditions: The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software. THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN THE SOFTWARE.

Further reference: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIT_License
by jimmcslim | 2025-04-21 11:47:24+00:00
The Vatican published an interesting document on AI [1], which attributes a number of quotes to Pope Francis:

* As Pope Francis noted, the machine “makes a technical choice among several possibilities based either on well-defined criteria or on statistical inferences. Human beings, however, not only choose, but in their hearts are capable of deciding."

* In light of this, the use of AI, as Pope Francis said, must be “accompanied by an ethic inspired by a vision of the common good, an ethic of freedom, responsibility, and fraternity, capable of fostering the full development of people in relation to others and to the whole of creation.”

* As Pope Francis observes, “in this age of artificial intelligence, we cannot forget that poetry and love are necessary to save our humanity.”

* As Pope Francis observes, “the very use of the word ‘intelligence’” in connection with AI “can prove misleading”

[1] https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/docu...
by alistairSH | 2025-04-21 11:48:00+00:00
The problem with Insta as a “hip LinkedIn” is I can’t even browse it properly without an account. Say I find an interesting business elsewhere and Ggogle them; their primary web presence is Insta; I find their page, but cannot browse their photos/posts.

So, it’s a pretty shit tool for a business to share what it’s about.
by throwaway277432 | 2025-04-21 11:48:01+00:00
No!

Once you change the copyright line, you no longer include "the above copyright notice". At that point you're violating the license.

You are also not allowed to change the copyright notice or license text in any way (you may however add to the license, which is a loophole other licenses such as GPL fix.)

Substantial is subject to (legal) debate as the Oracle vs. MS case has shown. Whole functions or large parts of files however should always be considered substantial, as the software would otherwise not work.

I'm seriously flabbergasted at how bad reading comprehension seems to be among coders.
by SantiagoVargas | 2025-04-21 11:48:58+00:00
If a tree falls in the forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?

You bring up a good point. I think it to be less of a problem for more established companies that don't face unexpected outages too often. When we were starting out with our mobile app however this wasn't the case, and each outage meant downloads lost which were critical for getting early feedback. I see it as a bigger pain point for early founders/small teams whose server could see a lot of volatility.

So far we haven't encountered any false positives (been using it for around 6 months) but perhaps with the wrong endpoint that could be a problem. I'll keep an eye out for that.
by ryao | 2025-04-21 11:49:17+00:00
I initially was going to say:

Failing to abide by the MIT license is copyright infringement. My advice is to contact these guys: https://softwarefreedom.org/ They likely can file a cease and desist on your behalf.

However, I took a closer look at the files in question. The MIT license requires that they retain and provide copyright notices, but you never put copyright notices in your files. The only place where you appear to have placed a copyright notice is in the LICENSE file:

https://github.com/spegel-org/spegel/commit/23ed0d60f66dd292...

Things become interesting when I look at their LICENSE file. They appear to have tried to relicense this to Apache 2.0 before backpedaling and reinstating the MIT license:

https://github.com/Azure/peerd/commit/473a26c808907f2d9f7b7f...

Unless they forked from a very early version of the project that did not even have the LICENSE file, they removed the sole copyright notice you had in the repository. That brings us back to my original thoughts, which is that they have committed copyright infringement, and you should contact OSS friendly lawyers about it.

I am not a lawyer, but I do contribute to various OSS projects and all of the ones to which I have ever contributed have copyright notice headers at the top of every file to ensure proper attribution is maintained no matter where that code is used. Beyond having that sole missing copyright notice reinstated, I am not sure what else you could expect since none of your files have proper copyright headers in them. The SFLC guys would be in a better position to advise you, as they are actual lawyers.
by hardwaresofton | 2025-04-21 11:49:51+00:00
And just to be really clear -- it's not actually a solution to cloud providers not reusing the code for profit (which I assume is the context you're implying, could be wrong here), because AGPL is free software, so people are free to reuse your code for commercial purposes. AGPL at least prevents making private improvements to open source networked code without contributing back.

I think in this situation it might have convinced Microsoft to contribute rather than fork... But then again, it's Microsoft. Also, they're well under their right to fork and keep the changes as long as the license stays the same, etc.

I think another important point might be that "free software" aims to protect the users of free software, not necessarily the profit-maximizing (I mean to use that phrase neutrally) ability of software developers.
by freeamz | 2025-04-21 11:49:54+00:00
Hmm, think we ought to judge on a case by case basis. However, for megacorp and especially banks that has almost 0 to 1% access to cost of capital, vs rest of us who at at 20 - 30 % ( for credit card, loan sharks), then there should be a different license for these people. There should be a GLP type license adjusted to the cost of the capital.
by redeyedtreefrog | 2025-04-21 11:50:54+00:00
I hate lying to such an extent that the moment an interviewer starts digging into why I left past roles I just accept I'm not going to get the job. If the interviewer is trying to find out how much I am willing to play political games, then the answer is not at all. My experience is that something like 25 to 50 percent of people in leadership positions are there because they enjoy lying and playing games, are fundamentally difficult to work with, and are at best utterly mediocre at other aspects of their role. Perhaps the ratio is better at more prestigious companies, I wouldn't know. If interviewers (or anyone else) believe that makes me the problem because it's my duty to suck it up and smile then I no longer care (well, other than the amount of money such an attitude costs me...)
by buran77 | 2025-04-21 11:50:56+00:00
Because they're hoping not to antagonize the megacorp (too quickly). If a megacorp has you in their sights, especially in a country like the US where court battles are prohibitively expensive, pushing the envelope will just draw ire and aggression from that megacorp. A normal person has no negotiating leverage in front of MS especially when it comes to open source.

It's like negotiating with the mafia, you might get something out of it but if you cross the line you'll end up face down in a ditch and authorities will look the other way. Megacorps have stolen, copied, reverse engineered, replicated, etc. things since forever and it always worked out for them.

In this case MS didn't need any help. They could very well take everything and face no real repercussions (this is the reality when the majority is uneducated, and their elected representatives are greedy and spineless). So playing along gives some chance to get something positive out of it.
by ksec | 2025-04-21 11:51:59+00:00
I saw the quick demo and I thought why the heck hasn't anyone done this before. Seems so obvious once you seen it. Although as with everything I think I will need to try it first. I guess it works better now because the Link Previews opens up more like a Mobile sized version which works better than an old day where every web page expects you to be on Desktop.

>Ever found yourself with 100+ tabs open....

I do a lot of tabs. 100s and in my Firefox era 1000s. But I dont think this will help or solve that problem. But I will definitely solve a different sets of problems in browsing.
by Propelloni | 2025-04-21 11:52:00+00:00
Of course this predicates that there are differences between A and B. The GP is, I believe, making the point that claiming to protect unwanted unborn children (A) when campaigning for anti-abortion regulation is just a power-play to dictate a lifestyle choice, if it does not follow up with protecting the unwanted born children (B). I think, there is merit to this.

Observations shows that most societies forbid woman to throw their unwanted born child into a garbage bin, so if you claim that women are or should be as free as men in their lifestyle choices, where does that leave the woman? Either you need birth control to prevent that situation, or a social security network that takes care of the unwanted child after the fact. In my simple, male mind this should be a given. Otherwise, if I were a woman, I would refuse sex. The ancient Greeks have a funny story about that [0].

Of course, you can also say that women aren't allowed to be as free as men in their lifestyle choices. And I think, I'm not going too far out on a limb when I say that's actually at the bottom of this issue. Some people think it is OK to make women less free than men in the service of their ideals, while others think it is not. Resolve this tension and you will make progress.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lysistrata