MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by 20after4 | 2025-04-10 15:40:55+00:00
Suno is pretty good at going from a 3 or 4 word concept to make a complete song with lyrics, melody, vocals, structure and internal consistency. I've been thoroughly impressed. The songs still suck but they are arguably no worse than 99% of what the commercial music business has been pumping out for years. I'm not sure AI is ready to invent those concepts from nothing yet but it may not be far off.
by ckozlowski | 2025-04-10 15:41:05+00:00
Yup, that's certainly one. I see this technique as simply one more tool in the toolbox. Air defense (and really, all of warfare) is not a single "this thing is better than the rest" but a system of things that work in conjunction with one another. This system has advantages (passive, cheap, portable) and disadvantages (short range, clear weather only). It's good and useful work, and could conceivably be part of a larger system.
by BobaFloutist | 2025-04-10 15:41:47+00:00
Ok I have this pet idea for solving the tricky balance between "express" lines and having enough stops: With electric trains it's pretty trivial to give each car it's own motor, so what if every time you approach a stop the front car detaches from the train and shifts to the stop and a car at the station accelerates and attaches to the front of the train (or vice versa), all without the train ever stopping? Maybe it would have to slow a bit to make the attachment/detachment smoother, but you'd still skip the boarding wait and if it was going from like 600-300kph that would still be vastly better than starting and stopping.

You would board the train and get on the car that detaches at your intended destination. In the case that they want to run fewer cars than there are stops, either they could alternate which car detaches so that a core car makes it from start to end, or people wanting to make the whole trip would have to change cars sometimes.

Is this impossible? Would it be implausibly expensive? Is it "just an engineering challenge" like hydrogen fuel-cell cars (I.E. we'll figure it out just as soon as we have a better alternative)? I have no idea, but it sure sounds cool to me, and it doesn't feel like it's in the realm of fantasy.
by 0xBDB | 2025-04-10 15:41:49+00:00
With respect, this was not a good reply.

> 24 states have legalized weed and 39 have made it available for medical use, YET it is still illegal under federal ruling.

Congress at least has to pretend it has enumerated powers and is using them, most of the time, "promote the general welfare" notwithstanding. So do you know the basis for that federal "ruling"? Smoking weed, including weed grown in your backyard, substantially affects interstate commerce.

EDIT for source: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/21/801

> And remember, law doesn't work like code. It needs to be interpreted with intent.

Is this not my point rather than yours? Open the door for ill intent and the imprecise nature of the law means that the first people with ill intent will exploit it.

"Congress shall make no law" is not a rule we can use for absolutely everything, of course, but where it does not exist, Congress historically shall pretty much inevitably make a law. So the answer to "is my unpopular speech advertising if adverting can be regulated?" is "yes." Of course it will be regulated. Others have pointed out that this applies to lots of laws, not just speech, to which I say... yeah?
by ziddoap | 2025-04-10 15:41:52+00:00
That's just crazy to me. I'm not saying anyone is lying, just that I am in disbelief.

I taught some cybersec classes maybe 4-5 years ago and while students definitely struggled with some (what I would consider) "basic" stuff like CLI, variables, loops, etc... no one had an issue with directions like "copy this file to here", "extract the files to there", "set up this directory and point this tool to it", stuff like that.
by magneticnorth | 2025-04-10 15:42:12+00:00
It's a fairly well studied phenomenon known as short sleeper syndrome.

https://www.nih.gov/news-events/nih-research-matters/gene-id...

There are no known health problems caused by this syndrome, according to a Cleveland Clinic overview page: https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diseases/short-sleeper...
by nradov | 2025-04-10 15:42:32+00:00
Nah. That's such a naive and uniformed take. Signature reduction (stealth) remains broadly useful in that it makes air defense harder and more expensive. Anything based on cameras using ambient light is going to be of very limited use, especially at night or bad weather. And cameras can't be permanently installed on the open ocean.

The days of large aircraft are in no way "numbered". In order to have enough range to operate in the Indo-Pacific Theater that requires a lot of fuel, which implies a large aircraft (regardless of whether it's manned or unmanned). And while AI might eventually be effective at controlling combat aircraft, as of today that remains science fiction. So that means you need a person either directly in the combat aircraft, or actively controlling a large "loyal wingman" type drone from within line of sight (to ensure reliable communications in a hostile EW environment).
by roguecoder | 2025-04-10 15:42:33+00:00
The result of that top-down management style is buggy code, blown deadlines, security holes, and the slowest software development I've ever seen.

I've found it possible to migrate to a less top-down Desert style just by finding executives who are frustrated by those problems and saying, "I have an idea I've seen help" and then getting the team together and saying, "hey, it turns out the executives would like us to write software well. What should we try first?"

Product has plenty of work remaining: they should be handling whatever subset of strategy, prioritization, analytics, BI, QA, facilitation, design and contracts that they have the skills for. But it requires engineers to actually collaborate with them as a peer, rather than engage in power struggles, and that requires everyone on the team to understand what we are building, for whom, and why.
by chneu | 2025-04-10 15:42:34+00:00
You're summing up most of the stuff rural americans get upset about.

Rural americans have insanely high pollution rates per capita because most of their lifestyle is really resource intensive, which just doesn't scale.

Not everyone can drive a ford f850 superduty deisel to go get groceries. Not everyone can eat beef 3x/day. Not everyone can live on a few acres. Not everyone can hunt. Not everyone can have livestock. Not everyone can have 5 kids. Etc, etc.

A lot of rural americans just don't understand this, or don't care. To them it's "out of sight, out of mind". Then, once it comes to their back yard they lose their minds reacting to it because it finally affects them. When it happens to other people, those people can pull themselves up by their bootstraps. When it happens to them, then it's a national emergency.

I grew up in a rural area, hometown of 500 people. I grew up thinking this way. It's a pretty big mind shift.
by bflesch | 2025-04-10 15:43:11+00:00
Would be nice if you use your experience and financial stability of a Google job in order to build a better open-source protocol. Just like when ZX2C4 decided he's fed up with OpenVPN and went to create Wireguard this might be your moment to shine.

IMO the quality of software is only pushed forward by motivated individuals with the right skillset.
by anonfordays | 2025-04-10 15:43:14+00:00
>So maybe the people you mention are just being afraid to be judged for their true ideas?

Not at all, the "hunter" types in the US typically are unfiltered and direct and don't hide their thoughts and beliefs.

>Because either way, you can always go in the nature, and so many people go at least here in Switzerland, and just... go in the nature, spend time in that peaceful environment, period.

The fishing/hunting types spend much more time in nature without a gun than with one from what I've been told and seen. There are only a few weeks/months where it is legal to hunt in the US.
by danielvaughn | 2025-04-10 15:43:31+00:00
I really think that a design system solution has to be framework/implementation agnostic. It’s why I’ve never been too interested in shadcn, impressive though it may be.

Right now I’m trying to build a tool that produces an intermediate representation of your UI components, which can then be transpiled into whatever target format you prefer.

That way we can build design systems that aren’t coupled to a specific downstream tech stack.
by DmitryGrankin | 2025-04-10 15:43:32+00:00
Show HN: Vexa v0.2 - Open Source API to send a bot into Google Meet for real-time transcription

Hi HN,

I'm excited to share Vexa v0.2 https://github.com/Vexa-ai/vexa, the next step for our Apache 2.0 licensed open-source project aimed at providing enterprise-grade, API-first transcription infrastructure.

This release focuses on programmatic access to Google Meet transcription:

1. API-driven Bot: Send a bot to join a Google Meet call with a simple `POST /bots` request. 2. Real-time Transcription API: Get live, multilingual transcripts (Whisper-powered) via GET /transcripts/....

We built this on a new *open-source microservice architecture* designed for scalability, aiming to eventually support thousands of concurrent sessions and multiple platforms (Zoom, Teams are next).

The idea is to provide a reliable open core backend for developers building apps needing meeting intelligence, AI agents, or custom workflow integrations. This focus on open source is key for environments where security, transparency, and the option for eventual *self-hosting* are crucial (though this initial API access is via our cloud beta).

It's an open-source alternative to Recall.ai, focused on the API infrastructure layer.

Closed Beta (Cloud API): The API endpoint is currently in closed beta via our cloud infrastructure. We're looking for developers to try it out and give feedback, which will benefit both the API and the underlying open-source project.

Apply for a free API key here: https://api.dev.vexa.ai/pricing

Happy to answer any questions!
by hansvm | 2025-04-10 15:43:40+00:00
Oh, sure, the complaint wasn't about SQL per se, but that making complicated things easy to write isn't necessarily a win. Even if a big query perfectly represents the problem, and even if you can use compiled SQL to match hand-written efficiency, it still might not be the optimal way to approach the problem in the first place. If you have experience and plan for that it needn't be bad at all, but I think it's easier to write performance footguns in SQL (the "right" data model is more prescriptive, even with some number of years of experience, and is less likely to be tuned to your actual problems) than with traditional code, so I'd be quite surprised if the majority of game developers (even those with some degree of success currently average <3 YOE) wouldn't run into major performance issues with a SQL-based engine, even a good one.
by Rohansi | 2025-04-10 15:43:41+00:00
I am also skeptical of SpacetimeDB for the same reason. There is no game engine helping you do any simulation and that makes development harder. Your (server-side) assets would somehow need to be synced to SpacetimeDB which possibly means you can't use your editor tools to design them anymore.

As a service backend+database the concept is cool and probably useful. But I don't see it being good at being a game server.
by haberman | 2025-04-10 15:44:44+00:00
> other concepts that may not be so critical: `query` vs `aquery` vs `cquery`, action-graph vs configured-action-graph vs target-graph, providers vs outputs, macro vs rule-impl, etc

Almost all of the distinctions you mentioned are related to the way that Bazel has the concept of a "target", which lets the build graph work at a higher level than individual files.

Suppose you write the following in a BUILD file:

cc_library( name = "foo", srcs = ["foo.c"], hdrs = ["foo.h"], ) cc_library( name = "bar", srcs = ["bar.c"], hdrs = ["bar.h"], deps = [":foo"], )

This lets us define, at a high level, that ":foo" and ":bar" are C/C++ libraries, and that bar depends on foo. This is the build graph of targets, and it's independent of any particular files that these rules may produce (.o, .a, .so, etc).

It's nice to be able to query the build graph at this high level. It lets you see the relationship between components in the abstract, rather than a file-by-file level. That is what "bazel query" does.

But sometimes you might want to dig deeper into the specific commands (actions) that will be executed when you build a target. That is what "bazel aquery" is for.

Macros vs. rules is basically a question of whether the build logic runs before or after the target graph is built. A macro lets you declare a bit of logic where something that looks like a target will actually expand into multiple targets (or have the attributes munged a bit). It is expanded before the target graph is built, so you won't see it in the output of "bazel query."

If you took away the target graph, I think you'd take away a lot of what makes Bazel powerful. A key idea behind Bazel is to encapsulate build logic, so that you can use a rule like cc_library() without having to know how it's implemented or exactly what actions will run.

I don't say this to minimize any of the pain people experience when adopting Bazel. I'm actually curious to learn more about what the biggest pain points are that make it difficult to adopt.
by geokon | 2025-04-10 15:44:48+00:00
I'd love to use more than one window, but they're completely unpredictable and really hard to configure the way you want. Magit buffers will open in one way, Cider Error buffers open in some other way. And the behavior will also change based on your frame size... You can sometimes configure them, but only from the limited behaviors provided by the package itself. The behaviors are different in different packages and there is no configuration/coordination in the "runtime"
by os2warpman | 2025-04-10 15:45:13+00:00
Christmas 1992 I paid $49.99 for Super Mario Kart. That is $112.43 in 2025 money.

In my state minimum wage is $15 so that is 7.5 hours of sitting in a lifeguard chair.

In 1992 I had to sit in a lifeguard chair for 11.8 hours to afford Super Mario Kart.
by Philpax | 2025-04-10 15:45:20+00:00
Stating that LLMs are not more reliable or useful than ELIZA or SmarterChild is so incredibly off-base I have to wonder if you've ever actually used a LLM. Please run the same query past ELIZA and Gemini 2.5 (https://aistudio.google.com/prompts/new_chat) and report back.
by rbanffy | 2025-04-10 15:45:39+00:00
Performance is not a single number. Mainframes are terrible choices for HPC, AI training, data analytics, etc. Where they excel is that narrow niche of high-volume, real-time transaction processing. In order to get there, the whole design of the machine is carefully balanced - the right number of cores per socket, the cache sizes (and the dynamic allocation of L3 and L4 according to pressures, trying to minimize eviction) all the way to CICS, z/OS and the way they allocate memory and processing power.
by nyrikki | 2025-04-10 15:46:08+00:00
In C, that is really because Unary minus (negation) has precedence over binary operations.

+a - b; // equivalent to (+a) - b, NOT +(a - b) -c + d; // equivalent to (-c) + d, NOT -(c + d)

https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/operator_arithmet...

+-e; // equivalent to +(-e), the unary + is a no-op if “e” is a built-in type // because any possible promotion is performed during negation already

The same doesn't apply to, !! Which is applied as iterated binary operations (IIRC)

I am pretty sure the decriment operator came around well after that quirk was established.
by _mlbt | 2025-04-10 15:46:14+00:00
You’re deliberately dodging my question. Your point is also true of most gun control laws. Short of full confiscation you will not stop people from obtaining guns illegally via straw purchases or theft. Gun control will also not prevent law abiding citizens that suddenly become homicidal with no priors.

So again, what specific gun control laws would actually make a difference that aren’t already on the books?
by sizzzzlerz | 2025-04-10 15:46:35+00:00
I really liked the movie which was pretty faithful to Clancy's book and, I think, to submarine life itself but the one thing I didn't like about it was the choice of Sean Connery as Ramius. For a supposed Russian speaker, his Scottish accent was a bit jarring to my ears. He did a great job with the role but the believability was compromised. I be curious to know who the producers considered for that part and why they were rejected.
by saturn8601 | 2025-04-10 15:46:53+00:00
You sure its just the 3.4%? 5% is considered 'full employment' so 3.4 should be some of the best times in history.

How many people are employed but are in a job that barely provides enough money to survive? How many people are working 2 or even 3 jobs just to barely survive? Those people would be counted as 'employed'. You should look at these other groups of people before making judgement.
by TimTheTinker | 2025-04-10 15:47:08+00:00
This is so, utterly, unspeakably, NOT a good idea to use.

You're trusting a third-party server with the plaintext of an actual secret. This violates nearly every principle of good modern security.

If the author had somehow built and documented (and proved) a true zero-trust model that enables this kind of interaction, then that might be cool. But that is not this. For all we know, the author (or an insider threat working at AWS) is collecting these passwords into a database for crackers to try first before proceeding to cracking password hashes.

There are so many other ways to do this. E2E encrypted messaging with disappearing messages (Signal) is the bare minimum. Keybase messages (also E2EE) are also a semi-decent option. 1Password password sharing is a decent usability step up from those. For all three of these options, barring a compromise of the (carefully guarded) process for shipping frontend code to users, the security design guarantees no visibility to a third party, and they have white papers that go into great depth to explain why.
by cyral | 2025-04-10 15:47:22+00:00
Note the use of the Caddy webserver (you could also use nginx or whatever), which proxies to the port, so it's just myapp.localhost. I like this because it mirrors our production site. We can have subdomain.myapp.localhost and subdomain.myapp.com so links and everything work properly in both environments (assuming you have an env variable for the base domain)
by NoTeslaThrow | 2025-04-10 15:47:39+00:00
> There are no known health problems caused by this syndrome

Presumably they mean there's no evidence of this syndrome causing health issues (presumably the "known" part is redundant). Trying to position a causal hypothesis as a matter-of-fact-finding is crazy.

EDIT: that article is insanely poorly written and even worse cited. How are these websites giving super-sketchy medical advice even legal. There's no author to hold accountable, no way to remediate the quality of the article, no sources cited, and it's making statements that wouldn't hold up in a court of law.
by fuhsnn | 2025-04-10 15:48:04+00:00
Not a programmer, are you? Programmers can fully investigate the compiled binary without anyone even has a chance to lie to them. If a team don't have the ability to audit the decompilation of a 10k LOC C compiler at least once, I doubt their chance against a backdoor hidden in the 100s of steps of https://github.com/fosslinux/live-bootstrap/blob/master/part...
by ericmcer | 2025-04-10 15:48:09+00:00
Anecdotal also but I sometimes sleep alone in my office (have a futon) where it is very quiet. I usually feel fully rested after 6 hours in there versus 8 hours in bed with wife, dog and the cat occasionally coming through.

I wish culturally it was standard for houses to have something like `sleep` rooms that are optimized for that purpose.
by WorldMaker | 2025-04-10 15:48:13+00:00
Because .local looks nice and is a better name/explainer for what mDNS does than the standard name or the old brand name? Because the old brand was already using .local even if Apple Devices were somewhat a minority at the time?

At this point a lot of TLD changes are going to step on someone's project or home/business/private network. I think .local is a good name for mDNS. I appreciate why you maybe aren't happy with it, but don't share your concern.
by LocalH | 2025-04-10 15:48:54+00:00
The problem is the algorithms that surface people's posts to those not friends with or following them. That's what turns a basic and true "social media" into a hyper-competitive arena which encourages a race to the bottom, to make the cheapest content possible to grab eyeballs.

"Social media" should not be a hyper-concentrated collection of advertising targets. That single aspect has probably caused 99% of "social medial ills.
by dymk | 2025-04-10 15:49:27+00:00
We don't have time to wait for a bunch of diesel engines to die of old age - as you know, they're quite long lived. And how long do you think is reasonable for diesel to be "phased out"? DEF became mandatory in the mid-2000s. It's been long enough.

At some point you have to draw a line and say, we're not going to allow something that spits out this much pollution just to make catching fish as cheap as it used to be.
by chneu | 2025-04-10 15:50:01+00:00
You view them as negative because you're only thinking about how it affects you.

There are clear benefits to banning diesel engines in freshwater. That's why so many places are doing it. Lots of people support these measures because it's a very clear benefit.

If a business can't afford to operate without being subsidized by the environment, they shouldn't be allowed to operate. When you use those diesel engines, you're taking out a loan using the environment. That loan needs to be repaid, and it gets repaid in the from of destruction rebuild costs. So when you complain about how "it would cost blah blah to do this safely", what you're really saying is "I want to destroy the environment for some cheap fun" which is deeply, deeply selfish. When you hear the total cost of disasters, think about it in the form of debt being repaid. That $1 billion because of so and so fire, that's the environment coming to collect the debt we racked up because we wanted cheap stuff and recreation.

Remember, your freedom ends where mine begins.
by peterldowns | 2025-04-10 15:51:01+00:00
If you’re interested in doing local web development with “real” domain names, valid ssl certs, etc, you may enjoy my project Localias. It’s built on top of Caddy and has a nice CLI and config file format that you can commit to your team’s shared repo. It also has some nice features like making .local domain aliases available to any other device on your network, so you can more easily do mobile device testing on a real phone. It also syncs your /etc/hosts so you never need to edit it manually.

Check it out and let me know what you think! (Free, MIT-licensed, single-binary install)

Basically, it wraps up the instructions in this blogpost and makes everything easy for you and your team.

https://github.com/peterldowns/localias
by ajross | 2025-04-10 15:51:14+00:00
> And while AI might eventually be effective at controlling combat aircraft, as of today that remains science fiction

That's ridiculous, sorry. There are literally AI bots being banned every day on War Thunder! There are armed long-range drones under cross-continent satellite control already! Of all the things AI/automation might have trouble with, operating rigorously-documented aircraft systems and making shoot/don't-shoot decisions of a handful of targets is surely one of the easiest[1]. If you as a military planner don't do this because you think it's impossible, you're going to lose.

[1] I mean seriously: would you have an easier time making AI to fire a missile or sew a prom dress? Not even close, the dress is harder. And AI garment manufacture is reaching the market already!