MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by Thorrez | 2025-04-15 00:52:01+00:00
>if you don't hold any shares, then you have closed the position.

Even if I acquire new shares < 30 days later?

My employer (Google) had a CPA give a recorded presentation about how to file RSU taxes. In it he said that the vests can was your sales, and this is especially prevalent if you have monthly vesting. This was a CPA who specializes in helping Google employees file taxes.

> Your other two points - states don't do income tax calculations based on the grant, but only what vested while you lived/worked in the state in the respective year of the vesting.

See https://www.reddit.com/r/tax/comments/q8ythd/interstate_move... .

Also, that same CPA gave a different recorded presentation specifically about state-to-state RSU taxes, and he said that if you work from another state, you need to track the number of days between grant and vest that you work from that other state in order to properly attribute the earnings to non-resident states.
by crmd | 2025-04-15 00:53:07+00:00
This is true for ultra high net worth individuals. They can do schemes like borrowing against equities and using the tax-free cash for expenses or purchasing other assets.

It is also true for many “normal” one percenters. For example there is a service for incorporated anesthesiologists where you tell them where you plan to go on vacation and what dates, and they create a bullshit anesthesiology conference, including the brochure and other artifacts, that meet the letter of the law IRS definitions for a valid business expense. None of this stuff ever hits AGI.
by Dibby053 | 2025-04-15 00:53:21+00:00
It is a thing.

For livestreams there's AceStream built on BitTorrent, but I think it's closed-source. They do have some SDK but I never looked into it. It's mostly used by IPTV pirates. I've used it a few times and it's hit-or-miss but when it works well I have been able to watch livestreams in HD/FullHD without cuts. Latency is always very bad though.

Then for video-on-demand there are some web-based ones like PeerTube (FOSS) and I think BitChute? Sadly webtorrent is very limited.
by hansvm | 2025-04-15 00:53:34+00:00
Does it suffice to load the content with JS or WASM to keep them out, or are they using some sort of emulated/headless browser?

If they're running JS or WASM, can the JS run a few calls likely to break (e.g., something in the WebGPU API set, since they likely aren't paying for GPUs in their scraping farm)?
by xyzzy123 | 2025-04-15 00:54:18+00:00
Can you point to a specific security problem this change is actually solving? For example, can we attribute any major security compromises in the last 5 years to TLS certificate lifetime?

Are the security benefits really worth making anything with a valid TLS certificate stop working if it is air-gapped or offline for 48 days?

> CAs and certificate consumers (browsers) voted in favour of this change. They didn't do this because they're incompetent but because they think it'll improve security.

They're not incompetent and they're not "evil", and this change does improve some things. But the companies behind the top level CA ecosystem have their own interests which might not always align with those of end users.
by Thorrez | 2025-04-15 00:54:31+00:00
See my answer in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43687920 .

In terms of the amount of tax to MI, it's not a whole lot. A couple hundred dollars. And it doesn't change my total taxes paid, because I get a tax credit for that against my CA taxes. MI's tax rate is lower than CA's.
by ggm | 2025-04-15 00:55:11+00:00
I think this is a classic example of headline number being scare of a factual report. Yes. this number is in the report. No, it's not black-and-white "ban CT scans"

The number of cancers found, the number of cancers attributed to the CT radiation dose, the number of OTHER cancers found, and dealt with, it's a far more complex story.

They try to say this in the report:

> That's based on some assumptions and historical data from high radiation events, but if right, it would put CT scans on par with other significant risk factors for cancer, like alcohol consumption, at least at a population level.

So, if we're going to target CT scans as a risk, lets start with returning to prohibition. one.. two.. three..

> "To empirically quantify lifetime risk would require decades-long follow-up studies of very large populations," the authors admit.

Admit is again headline-ese. It's just a pretty straightforward thing: epidemiology on risk in these matters has to weigh up many many things.

What about Radiation hormesis?
by haswell | 2025-04-15 00:55:33+00:00
That’s understandable, especially in the current climate. I’ve definitely encountered the straw men from the anti-science types too, and it’s incredibly frustrating.

As a layperson, I often come in contact with people who believe in science but fall into what is essentially scientific absolutism and see philosophy as irrelevant. I was one of those people in my 20s before I went down some rabbit holes that set me straight. Many of the people around me did not.

The scientists I know are not the absolutist types. I sometimes forget there are more scientists here than the average internet community.
by AlotOfReading | 2025-04-15 00:55:49+00:00
FPGAs might not be ideal, but AMD's NPU IP originated with Xilinx.

Intel was an early player to so many massive industries (e.g. XScale, GPGPU, hybrid FPGA SoCs). Intel abandoned all of them prematurely and has been left playing catch-up every time. We might be having a very different discussion if literally any of them had succeeded.
by johnnyanmac | 2025-04-15 00:56:30+00:00
I'm really tired of this song and dance at this point of being alarmist for trusting every little thing Trump says he'll do, no matter how crazy.

This is the exact opposite of the Boy who Cried Wolf. How many sheep need to be eaten before you trust the shepard? Or you know, the wolf who keeps saying "I'm going to eat these sheep"?
by ethbr1 | 2025-04-15 00:56:40+00:00
> it’s a regular occurrence for Intel to announce a bold new venture to try to claim some new territory, and just as regular that they announce they’re halting that venture in the name of “consolidating” and “focusing on their core.” [...] [Intel's new thing's] expected lifespan is shorter than the average Google product.

You got there in the end. You get the same outcome with the same corporate incentive.

Both Intel and Google prioritize {starting something new} over {growing an existing thing}, in terms of corporate promotions and rewards, and therefore employees and leaders self-optimize to produce the repeated behavior you see.

The way to fix this would be to decrease the rewards for starting a new thing and increase the rewards for evolving and growing an existing line of business.
by philsnow | 2025-04-15 00:57:10+00:00
This part was galling to me; somewhere in the USPS, the data about what mailpieces/packages are arriving soon exist in a very concise form, and they templatize an email and send it to me, after which I can parse the email with simple+brittle regexes or forward the emails to a relatively (environmentally-)expensive LLM or so.... but if they'd made the information available with an API or RSS feed, or attached the json payload to the email in the first place, I could get away without parsing.
by voidhorse | 2025-04-15 00:57:21+00:00
I think this is a pretty good introduction but it gets a little bogged down in the binary encoding assumption, which is an extraneous detail. It does help to know why the logarithm is chosen as a measure of information though regardless of base, once you know that "entropy" is straightforward. I'd agree that much of the difficulty arises from the uninformative name and the various mystique it carries.

To try to expand on the information measure part from a more abstract starting point: Consider a probability distribution, some set of probabilities p. We can consider it as indicating our degree of certainty about what will happen. In an equiprobable distribution, e.g. a fair coin flip (1/2, 1/2) there is no skew either which way, we are admitting that we basically have no reason to suspect any particular outcome. Contrarily, in a split like (1/4, 3/4) we are stating that we are more certain that one particular outcome will happen.

If you wanted to come up with a number to represent the amount of uncertainty, it's clear that the number should be higher the closer the distribution is to being completely equiprobable (1/2, 1/2)—complete lack of certainty about the result, and the number should be smallest when we are 100% certain (0, 1).

This means that the function has to be an order inversion on the probability values—that is I(1) = 0 (no uncertainty). The logarithm, to arbitrary base (selecting a base is just a change of units) has this property under the convention that I(0) = inf (that is, a totally improbable event carries infinite information—after all, an impossibility occurring would in fact be the ultimate surprise).

Entropy is just the average of this function taken over the probability values (multiply each probability in the distribution by the log of the inverse of the probabilities and sum them). In info theory you also usually assume the probabilities are independent, and so the further condition that I(pq) = I(p) + I(q) is also stipulated.
by ChristopherDrum | 2025-04-15 00:57:33+00:00
As a side-note to the Scott Adams interpreter and the struggle of writing in BASIC, it should be noted that Scott Adams's original work was in fact in BASIC. He published that source code in BYTE Magazine, should anyone wish to poke around and see what was required to get a game and parser working.

https://archive.org/details/byte-magazine-1980-12/page/n193/...
by ClumsyPilot | 2025-04-15 00:58:39+00:00
> Do all cases in the UK start with a GP?

yes, and in the entire GP practice they do not have a single device invented in the 21st century. All the tools they have are a stethoscope, oxymeter, otoscope, blood pressure monitor, basically stuff you might have at home

They can't, for example, do a rapid antigen test or a lateral flow test, ultrasound or anything else you may consider a sign of modern medicine and diagnostics. Stuff countries in Eastern Europe and East Asia have already adopted.

Their diagnostic conclusion is heavily influenced by a spreadsheet that lists statistic probability of illness for different demographics, as advised Mckinsey.

If you happen to have a serious condition but fall into a group that is 'suppose to be' healthy (young man with Pneumonia) you will be bounced and told to go home until your condition deteriorates.

They will gatekeep you from getting an X-ray. When your condition deteriorates and is incontrovertible you will be taken seriously, but now you need serious treatment instead of a quick round of antibiotics.

Popular opinion in Britain is that the NHS is great, but it's overburdened. But it's fallen behind - management practices are archaic, diagnostics is poor, and there is lack of accountability and first reaction to medical errors is to brush off the patients / victims.

Over the past few decades, the first reaction of NHS management is to cover up their mistakes.

Just read the Wiki page about Great Ormond Street Hospitalk, the hospital that treats the country's most severely ill children:

> Great Ormond Street Hospital was involved in a scandal regarding the removal of live tissue and organs from children during surgery and onward sale to pharmaceutical companies without the knowledge of parents in 2001

Or the case with bone surgeon Yaser Jabbar, at the same hospital, who caused severe harm to 22 children and the hospital fought the parents and brushed issues under the carpet. Issues like removing wrong organ and getting length of a foot wrong by 20 centimeters. He operated on 700 children before someone put a stop to it
by cmrdporcupine | 2025-04-15 00:59:20+00:00
So this actually makes more sense to me than the '816. Here's why:

The 816 has a 24-bit address bus. But its registers are limited to 16-bits. So there's no way to represent a "full" address in a register. Aka a pointer can't be held in a register.

Unfortunately this core, staying true to the 816, still has a 16-bit program counter and the awkward banked address scheme of the 816. I assume it has the same restriction of limiting stack and direct-page to the 00-bank, too?

The 816 really felt to me like Mensch just kind of bolted a little circuitry on the side of the 502. It doesn't have the simplistic elegance of the 6502.

A "better" 32-bit 65xx I think would be just to widen all registers (including program counter) out to 32-bits and leave it at that, forgetting about binary compatibility. A big linear memory.
by ajross | 2025-04-15 00:59:57+00:00
"Congress shall make no law" is not unclear, nor is the idea from the declaration that " all men are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights". There is no spot in the founding philosophy of this nation that makes a home for "rights of citizens" only, and there was copious space to fill that in if they wanted. You made that shit up.

What you're doing is scriptural prestidigitation. It's the equivalent of christians deciding that Satan and the serpent in the garden are the same entity, even though it's very clear that they aren't[1]. You're doing it because it makes your world view seem like less of an incoherent mess, not because it's true.
by bobxmax | 2025-04-15 01:00:09+00:00
> One would usually share those numbers to get more money from investors.

.... yes they share them with their prospective investors, not publicly lol. did you seriously just say this?

> What the fuck would their competitors do with their retention numbers?

The fact that you would even ask this question (and your ridiculous previous comment) shows your ineptitude and how pointless it is to discuss this with you

Run along now, go tell everyone how Dropbox is just a pointless FTP wrapper and will never catch on
by esperent | 2025-04-15 01:01:28+00:00
Most likely it's from inexperience with licensing. Many people choose MIT because it's the most popular open source license, without really thinking about how permissive it is and whether they want that for their project.

Maybe someone from this thread could open an issue and suggest they clarify this.

I don't personally know enough about licensing to say whether a sentence in the README.md (saying it can't be sold) is enough to override the LICENSE.md (which says it can be sold).

Personally I'd always choose a copyleft license for something like this.
by nisa | 2025-04-15 01:02:44+00:00
It still works without any blockchain and there are dockerfiles and images for using it with CLI only on github. It's closed source through and the UI was a forked version of VLC - it's also been suspected to spread malware - CLI tools look fine through but who knows.

Surprisingly the channels that are available work really well if you just use the mpegts stream.

In a past life I've added a few channels to a tvheadend instance on a VPS. It reliable crashed Kodi watching some channels and I've wondered if it's just broken streams or something more interesting is going on.

If you open the ports and watch popular channels it's easily saturating bandwidth - there is no limit.

I've since stopped using it it's the kind of thing that breaks not often enough to be not useless but often enough to be annoying.

It's IPv4 only and seems to use it's own tracker or at least calls to some URLs for initial peer discovery.

Building something similar as true open source would be great but I guess the usecase is mostly illegal streaming.

Be careful - it's attempting to use upnp to open ports on the router and even if just looking through the lists makes you upload fragments.

Still fascinating tool. It's getting to close to what op is looking for but I think it has scalability issues and everything about it is kind of shady and opaque.
by WalterBright | 2025-04-15 01:03:58+00:00
> This is true for ultra high net worth individuals.

Anyone can borrow money against their stocks, house, or credit card. It's tax-free as well.

> They can do schemes like borrowing against equities and using the tax-free cash for expenses or purchasing other assets.

Um, borrowing money is not "income". You have to pay it back, with interest.
by throwaway7394 | 2025-04-15 01:06:40+00:00
There's a minimum charge, as well a percentage.

> Washington will also increase the per postal item fee on goods entering after May 2 and before June 1 to $100 from the planned $75. Parcels entering after June 1 will pay a fee of $200 per item instead of $150 announced previously, according to the Wednesday order.

ref. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-04-10/trump-aga...
by fn-mote | 2025-04-15 01:06:57+00:00
> If it's a bad idea, it's a bad faith argument

I believe the GP is just cautioning rando HN readers that they should not rush out and make their down payment in the manner described, as opposed to liquidating some of their stock options for "real cash" like the GGP had to do.

They are just explaining a reasonable method that the (above) average HN reader could use to be in the same situation as Bezos of having a 0% tax on their down payment.

In the US, there's a pretty massive exemption (well, deferral) for capital gains tax on the sale of a primary residence, so once you have one home to work with, the down payment is (kind of?) tax-free anyway.
by WalterBright | 2025-04-15 01:07:05+00:00
No money was "funneled" to Elon. He created it.

As for making lives better, Starlink was provided free to disaster victims in N Carolina and the LA fires. Something the government failed at. Enabled by cheap reusable SpaceX rockets, another thing the government failed at. Starlink is very popular, so it must be making peoples' lives better.
by linsomniac | 2025-04-15 01:07:07+00:00
>they empower people with minimal development experience to create their own programs.

The author goes out of their way to play up the toy aspect of the LLMs when driven by the inexperienced. No mention is made of them being used by experienced developers, but I get the impression he feels they aren't useful to the experienced.

I'm just playing with a small client/server tool (rsync but for block devices), and vibe coding allowed me to figure out some rough edges of my design document, and experiment with "what would it look like built with threads? As async code? As procedural?) I would never have done that before because of the sheer amount of time it would take, I'd have picked what I thought was best and then lived with the sunk cost falacy until I had no other choice. It did a pretty good job of catching reasonable exceptions in the communication code which I probably would have just let throw a traceback until I got a bug report. It did a great job of adding logging and debugging options. And I had it take 4 attempts at making a "fancy" --progress display and picked the one I liked the best.

LLMs give a level of exploration to software development that we haven't seen since the good old days when HP set up several groups to each build their next generation workstation environment, and then picked the best one.

IMHO, the experienced software developers stand at a unique position to take advantage of these LLMs that far outstrip what an inexperienced developer can do.
by ethbr1 | 2025-04-15 01:07:18+00:00
In this case it's not Trump but Peter Navarro [0] who doesn't understand how tariffs work, because he's apparently never looked into multiparty game theory.

Exhibit A: Navarro being sidelined and Scott Bessent put in charge of running tariff negotiations, after the bond markets spooked.

[0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Navarro
by degamad | 2025-04-15 01:07:20+00:00
> The only thing that matters in this kind of application is false negative rate at some acceptable false positive rate.

It sounds like they are inverting the scenario here. The question is not "do you have skin cancer?", it's "can you safely go home without seeing a doctor?".

For this new question, we set the acceptable false positive rate to zero (we never want to send a real cancer case home), and determine the false negative rate (we accept that some benign cases will be seen by a doctor).

The reason for the interest in identifying benign cases, rather than trying to identify the positive cases, is that it improves the situation for everybody: benign cases identified by AI are sent home almost immediately, everyone else has a shorter waiting time, so benign false negatives can be assessed more quickly by the doctor and given the all clear, and more time is now available for spending with the real cancer cases.

The numbers they're citing are 7000 cases with 5% real, so 350 real cancer, 6650 benign. If we can accurately say that 6500 of those benign cases are benign without wasting the doctors' time, then we're down to only 500 people needing to see a doctor, which is a huge improvement for everyone.
by hayst4ck | 2025-04-15 01:07:20+00:00
That is exactly what they mean already. Disobedience towards their authority is hate.

It's already in their language. Trump Derangement Syndrome encodes exactly this idea. The idea reverses victim and abuser. Those victimized by his policies are seen as people with an irrational hatred making them act out rather than as people with a justified disagreement.
by jmye | 2025-04-15 01:08:13+00:00
Y'all have a lot of inner city neighborhoods that have been systematically destroyed over decades due to redlining, Jim Crow laws, lynching their inhabitants or just outright burning them to the ground, or is “but we do it in Europe” maybe frequently as stupid a comment as “but we do it in America” and is best kept to one’s self, if one doesn’t actually understand how it might be applicable?

Also, bullshit on IQ tests. They do reliably predict a number of socioeconomic factors, so I suppose they’re a great way to keep the poors out. How very “enlightened” of you.
by dismalaf | 2025-04-15 01:09:44+00:00
AMD is appropriately valued IMO, Intel is undervalued and Nvidia is wildly overvalued. We're hitting a wall with LLMs, Nvidia was at one point valued higher than Apple which is insane.

Also CUDA doesn't matter that much, Nvidia was powered by intense AGI FOMO but I think that frenzy is more or less done.
by Zambyte | 2025-04-15 01:09:46+00:00
> But I think your confusion is more about how what a compiler means by pointer type, and what a human means. If you pull away enough layers of abstraction, the compiler doesn't see *Type it'll only see *anyopaque, phrased completely differently; according to the compiler, all pointers are the same and are exactly memory_address_size() big. *Type doesn't really exist.

Check out the implementation of SinglyLinkedList in the latest release (before the change in the post)[0]. You'll notice the argument for SinglyLinkedList is (comptime T: type), which is used in the internal Node struct for the data field, which is of type T. Notably, the data field is not a *T.

In Zig, when you call the function SinglyLinkedList with the argument i32 (like SinglyLinkedList(i32)) to return a type for a list of integers, the i32 is used in the place of T, and a Node struct that is unique for i32 is defined and used internally in the returned type. Similarly, if you had a struct like Person with fields like name and age, and you created a list of Persons like SinglyLinkedList(Person), a new Node type would be internally defined for the new struct type returned for Person lists. This internal Node struct would instead use Person in place of T. The memory for the Node type used internally in SinglyLinkedList(Person) actually embeds the memory for the Person type, rather than just containing a pointer to a Person.

These types are very much known to the compiler, as the layout of a Node for a SinglyLinkedList(i32) is not the same as the layout of a Node for a SinglyLinkedList(Person), because the argument T is not used as a pointer. Unless, as the gp mentioned, T is explicitly made to be a pointer (like SinglyLinkedList(*Person)).

[0] https://ziglang.org/documentation/0.14.0/std/#src/std/linked...