MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by Mindfusefounder | 2025-04-08 11:42:07+00:00
Most platforms optimize for engagement, not connection. Likes, feeds, followers—it’s all performance.

I wanted to build something simpler: One person. One voice. No names. No feed. No history. Just a conversation.

It’s anonymous, one-on-one, and global. Think of it as the opposite of social media—no metrics, no content, just real-time voice between two strangers.

I’m not trying to scale aggressively or monetize attention. Just testing the idea that talking still matters.

Would love your thoughts—technical, product, philosophical.
by BriggyDwiggs42 | 2025-04-08 11:42:31+00:00
I completely agree with disregarding the man/nature dichotomy, it’s complete nonsense. On the other hand, tool use and tool construction aren’t exactly the same as beaver dams, anthills, or bird nests because the particulars of the tool aren’t at all hardwired, which implies that the tool might have unexpected ramifications for the environment that would have otherwise been detected if the behavior had appeared over evolutionary timescales. A wariness towards self-conscious human ecosystem modification isn’t exactly unwarranted.
by SOLAR_FIELDS | 2025-04-08 11:42:45+00:00
The other problem with Github Actions that I always mention that muddies the waters when it comes to discussions of it is that GHA itself is front loaded as actually multiple different things:

1. Event dispatching/triggers, the thing that spawns webhooks/events to do things

2. The orchestration implementation (steps/jobs, a DAG-like workflow execution engine)

3. The reusable Actions marketplace

4. The actual code that you are running as part of the build

5. The environment setup/secrets of GHA, in other words, the makeup of how variables and other configurations are injected into the environment.

The most maintainable setups only leverage 1 directly from GHA. 2-5 can be ignored or managed through containerized workflow in some actual build system like Bazel, Nix, etc.
by Taek | 2025-04-08 11:43:10+00:00
I don't think there's consensus around that idea. Lots of people (myself included) feel that copyright is already vastly overreaching, and that AI represents forward progress for the proliferation of art in society (its crap today, but digital cameras were crap in 2007 and look where they are now).

Its also not clear for example that Studio Ghibli lost by having their art style plastered all over the internet. I went home and watched a Ghibli film that week, as I'm sure many others did as well. Their revenue is probably up quite a bit right now?

"How can we monetize art" remains an open question for society, but I certainly don't think that AI without restrictions is going to lead to fewer people with art jobs.
by flanked-evergl | 2025-04-08 11:43:48+00:00
> That man and brute are like is, in a sense, a truism; but that being so like they should then be so insanely unlike, that is the shock and the enigma. That an ape has hands is far less interesting to the philosopher than the fact that having hands he does next to nothing with them; does not play knuckle-bones or the violin; does not carve marble or carve mutton. People talk of barbaric architecture and debased art. But elephants do not build colossal temples of ivory even in a roccoco style; camels do not paint even bad pictures, though equipped with the material of many camel's-hair brushes. Certain modern dreamers say that ants and bees have a society superior to ours. They have, indeed, a civilization; but that very truth only reminds us that it is an inferior civilization. Who ever found an ant-hill decorated with the statues of celebrated ants? Who has seen a bee-hive carved with the images of gorgeous queens of old? No; the chasm between man and other creatures may have a natural explanation, but it is a chasm. We talk of wild animals; but man is the only wild animal. It is man that has broken out. All other animals are tame animals; following the rugged respectability of the tribe or type. All other animals are domestic animals; man alone is ever undomestic, either as a profligate or a monk.
by gcanyon | 2025-04-08 11:43:49+00:00
It's interesting to hear people side with the artists when in previous discussions on this forum I've gotten significant approval/agreement arguing that copyright is far too long.

As I've argued in the past, I think copyright should last maybe five years: in this modern era, monetizing your work doesn't (usually) have to take more than a short time. I'd happily concede to some sort of renewal process to extend that period, especially if some monetization method is in process. Or some sort of mechanical rights process to replace the "public domain" phase early on. Or something -- I haven't thought about it that deeply.

So thinking about that in this process: everyone is "ghiblifying" things. Studio Ghibli has been around for very nearly 40 years, and their "style" was well established over 35 years ago. To me, that (should) make(s) it fair game.

The underlying assumption, I think, is that all the "starving" artists are being ripped off, but are they? Let's consider the numbers -- there are a handful of large-scale artists whose work is obviously replicable: Ghibli, the Simpsons, Pixar, etc. None of them is going hungry because a machine model can render a prom pic in their style. Then you get the other 99.999% of artists, all of whose work went into the model. They will be hurt, but not specifically because their style has been ingested and people want to replicate their style.

Rather, they will be hurt because no one knows their style, nor cares about it; people just want to be able to say e.g. "Make a charcoal illustration of me in this photo, but make me sitting on a horse in the mountains."

It's very much like the arguments about piracy in the past: 99.99% of people were never going to pay an artist to create that charcoal sketch. The 0.01% who might are arguably causing harm to the artist(s) by not using them to create that thing, but the rest were never going to pay for it in the first place.

All to say it's complicated, and obviously things are changing dramatically, but it's difficult to make the argument that "artists need to be compensated for their work being used to train the model" without both a reasonable plan for how that might be done, and a better-supported argument for why.
by jdietrich | 2025-04-08 11:44:10+00:00
>Actually you should be able to bring it to one of the multiple 3rd party repair shops of your choice, get it fixed and not have Lenovo involved at all, except maybe by selling you parts at a reasonable price.

You already can, it's just often not economically viable in high-income countries. Lenovo have a very comprehensive parts service and provide useful service manuals.

Ironically, Apple devices are the most widely repaired by third-party specialists despite Apple's strenuous efforts to make that difficult, because they're expensive and depreciate slowly.
by loloquwowndueo | 2025-04-08 11:44:17+00:00
You should read the htmx “book” (https://hypermedia.systems/ ) where the use case is clearly explained. It advocates for using htmx to enhance a page with more interactivity by extending html semantics and behaviours a bit (thus requiring minimum effort and learning curve) and move to more heavyweight client-side front end stuff (react and friends) if more interactivity or complex behaviours are needed.

You can whip up a simple html form and spruce it up with htmx so it feels “modern” to current users, with little effort and changes and importantly without having to learn the insanity that are modern front end stacks. Not only curmudgeons from the 90s like me benefit from this!
by hnbad | 2025-04-08 11:44:28+00:00
> What the post should say is "we know that this is unfair to artists, but the tech companies are making too much money from them and we have no way to force them to change".

It seemed a fact of life that companies will just abuse your personal data to their liking and can do what they want with information they collect about you because "if it's free, you're the product" (and even if you paid for it, "you should know better" etc). Then GDPR and its international derivatives came along and changed that.

It seemd a fact of life that companies that technically don't have an actual market monopoly can do whatever they want within their vertically integrated walled gardens because competitors can just create their own vertically integrated walled gardens to compete with them and the rules for markets don't apply to walled gardens. Then the DSA and DMA came along and changed that.

I don't see why legislation can't change this, too. Of course just with the GDPR, DSA and DMA we'll hear from libertarians, megacorps and astroturf movements how unfair it all is to mom & pop startups and how it's going to ruin the economy but I think given the angle grider the US is currently taking to its own economy (and by extension the global economy because we're all connected), I think that's no longer a valid argument in politics.
by motorest | 2025-04-08 11:44:28+00:00
> If "those who they are able to effectively interact with" ends up meaning only people who look, act, or believe like them, then yes it absolutely is.

It's everyone. You don't get to cherry pick.

That's why hiring managers should focus on soft skills. Their job is to hire the guy that fits in your organization and everyone in it is able to effortlessly work with. When hiring managers do their job, you don't need to go way out of your way to suffer toxic people who are utterly unpleasant to work with. Hiring managers filter them out. Problem averted.
by 8fingerlouie | 2025-04-08 11:44:33+00:00
The thing is, in Europe at least, it was never about Tesla, it was always about Elon Musk doing the so called "roman salute", doing stuff that borders on election interference in Germany with the AfD, and Vance just kinda made it worse, which somehow also backfired on Elon.

The reason people in europe are not buying Teslas is because of Elon Musk, and regarding short memories, just about everybody i know, technically skilled or not, still knows that Steve Jobs was "the face of Apple", despite some of them not even being born when he died. People remember Elon Musk the same way with Tesla, and i don't see that going away soon.
by qiqitori | 2025-04-08 11:45:00+00:00
Wha- wha- what? I tried to generate an image in ChatGPT after the announcement a while back and the image wasn't bad, but the text on it (numbers) was nonsense. (Analog gauge with nonsense numbers instead of e.g. 10, 20, 30, 40, etc.)

Gave it another chance now, explicitly calling out the numbers. Well, they are improved but not sure how useful this result is (the spacing between numbers is a little off and there's still some curious counting going on. Maybe it kind of looks like the numbers are pasted in after the fact?

https://chatgpt.com/share/67f4fa33-70dc-8012-8e1e-2dea563d3d...
by anilakar | 2025-04-08 11:45:19+00:00
That's the main reason people have so mixed opinions about the language.

If you're stuck with the standard library (hello gsub!) and the application-specific library is an incoherent collection of functions, you're going to have a really bad time. That's the case too often because it's easier to plug the VM into an existing program than it is to create bindings that are not painful to use.

OTOH a well thought out environment makes you forget you're programming in Lua.
by ivan_gammel | 2025-04-08 11:45:56+00:00
Can you please read my comments in this thread in full and not just pick some parts of them?

I already explained that most businesses are not experts in privacy and usually become non-compliant accidentally, without malicious intent. If a plumber goes to some advertisement platform to promote their services online, they are not making fully informed decision with regards to privacy implications. They buy promises of lower CACs. They do not buy the storage of PII, neither they fully understand that targeted advertisement involves storage and processing of PII. And regulation requires them to either fully understand the process or spend money on external consultant. That's stupid: GDPR moved the responsibility to protect human rights from those who aggregate a lot of data to a little guy. What really should have been done is requirement for MarTech to support "Do not track" on protocol level and risk being fined or banned from EU. It does not make sense to ask users again and again on different websites if they are ok with tracking by FancyMarTech LLC, when those users already gave the answer somewhere.

It's just one example. And then there's a case with storing PII in Google Spreadsheet: everyone does that. Nobody mentions that in their privacy policy, even if DPO is involved. And probably they should not. Regulation should also consider the public risk. If one of those millions spreadsheets with a hundred names is leaked, let's fine the owner, sure. But let's not make a big compliance process for every owner of those millions spreadsheets. Let's say: Dear Google, if you want to work in EU, you cannot share the data of EU users with NSA or anyone. Keep it safe. Figure this out, we don't care how. We really should put 99% of compliance burden on processors and spare controllers.
by pavlov | 2025-04-08 11:46:31+00:00
Ok, so your list of “normal” frontend doesn’t support your original point:

”you want to push as much logic to the client”

React and Next have been moving in the opposite direction with SSR.

As I said, there isn’t a single right answer. Client-only vanilla JS offers one solution, hybrid SSR like Next/React offers another, and Htmx yet another with different tradeoffs on the same spectrum.
by trollbridge | 2025-04-08 11:46:40+00:00
From my experience with people who’ve spent years over there, there isn’t much desire for refugees to stay and become citizens. They are perceived by the voting public as competing for jobs. Jobs are perceived as scarce.

It is politically far more popular to run on a platform of getting rid of refugees and refugee camps.

There is also a very widespread perception that refugee camps are about making money for corrupt politicians and contractors, and that the UN or America or the EU or something is paying a lot of money and pays per head. So the public feels that more refugees = more corrupt money lining politicians’ pockets.

Against this context, there is no political future for “liberalising working rights” and “providing a path to citizenship”.
by shafyy | 2025-04-08 11:47:06+00:00
> Do you have a theory about when certain LLM capabilities emerge?

We do know how LLMs work, correct? We also know what they are capable of and what not (of course this line is often blurred by hype).

I am not an expert at all on LLMs or neuroscience. But it is apparent that having a discussion with a human vs. with an LLM is a completely different ballpark. I am not saying that we will never have technology that can "understand" and "think" like a human does. I am just saying, this is not it.

Also, just because a lot of progress in LLMs has been made in the past 5 years, that we can just extrapolate the future progress on this. Local maxima and technology limits are a thing.
by 8fingerlouie | 2025-04-08 11:47:34+00:00
Oh they're (probably) lazy like everybody else, with the difference being that they have something to hide that will potentially put them in jail.

I'm not too worried about your average "small scale" criminal suddenly becoming a criminal mastermind, but organized crime will certainly adopt safer ways of communicating, and those are the people you want to catch with electronic surveillance.

The small scale criminals usually leaves plenty of other clues that will allow the police to capture them.
by uecker | 2025-04-08 11:47:53+00:00
I don't really disagree with you, but I was also making a slightly different point. If you need absolute memory safety, you can use Rust (without ever using unsafe)

But you get 99% this way with C, a bit of discipline, and tooling and this also means maintaining a super clean code base with many warnings activated even though they cause false positives. My point is that these false positives are not a valid argument why this strategy does not work or is inferior.

Your claim is that it is inferior because you only get 99% of safety and not 100%. But one can question whether you actually get 100% in Rust in practice in a project of relevant size and complexity, due to FFI and unsafe. One can also question whether 100% memory safety is all that important when there also many other issues to look out for, but this is a different argument.
by rbanffy | 2025-04-08 11:48:25+00:00
> I think it's Linux on Z that makes it sexy and keeps it young

They feel fantastic when running Linux, but, if you don't need all the reliability features that come with the platform, commodity hardware might be a better choice for the kind of workload that has evolved on Linux.

> Depending on your workload there may be very good economical reasons to consider a mainframe instead of a number of rack-frames.

Absolutely - it makes a lot of the administrative toil disappear. I know clusters are sexy, but getting the job done is always better.
by alephnerd | 2025-04-08 11:48:52+00:00
Tiger Global, Seqouia, and Khosla Ventures invested in a lot of Brazilian fintech and neobank startups in the early/mid 2010s the same way they did in Indian fintech and what became IndiaStack in the early 2010s, and China's equivalent in the late 2000s.

YC has also been very active in the space in both markets by the late 2010s.

A lot of the work around Pix is largely thanks to the fact that neobanks like Nubank have become very competitive in the Brazilian market, and helped set higher consumer and business expectations for transaction processing and management.
by SwiftyBug | 2025-04-08 11:48:57+00:00
I've been living in Brazil for the last 20 years.

Pix revolutionised the way we transact in Brazil. I've used Pix to pay for things that cost only cents, and I have a friend who bought her house using Pix. The system just works for any transfer amount. And it's so easy to use.

Its speed is truly baffling, and so is its reliability. Never have I failed to make a Pix payment because of downtime. I never cease to be amazed by how fast money arrives in my Brazilian account when I make a withdrawal directly from my EUR wallet on Wise. I receive a push notification from my Brazilian bank before Wise finishes running the animation of confirmation of withdrawal. It's like magic.

And it's so widespread that nowadays I don't even question whether someone accepts Pix. When I get in a taxi, no matter how old the driver is, it's certain that they take (and prefer) Pix.

I've even had homeless people ask me for Pix instead of change on multiple occasions.

Cryptocurrencies don't stand a chance.
by throw10920 | 2025-04-08 11:49:51+00:00
> Ok, so your list of “normal” frontend doesn’t support your original point:

> ”you want to push as much logic to the client”

> React and Next have been moving in the opposite direction with SSR.

It doesn't matter - they still support client-side rendering, the other frameworks I listed are still client-side-rendering focused, and I explicitly enumerated vanilla webtech where that's the norm.

Please stop nitpicking my language. This is extremely tiring, boring, and not in the spirit of intellectual curiosity.
by HappMacDonald | 2025-04-08 11:50:37+00:00
Said responsibility can remain the choice of the consumer: producer must accept repair/replacement if consumer brings it back to them, but consumer is not forced to bring it back to them if anything goes wrong. Consumer may also choose to self-repair, sell, etc. Perhaps consumer must bring it back to dispose of it though, as nobody benefits from hucking it directly into a landfill.

The other difference between "renting" from the producer is that the producer isn't collecting any rent, only initial purchase.. and that producer cannot claim the item back whenever they please.
by sgarland | 2025-04-08 11:50:38+00:00
Except you can use AI (against the rules, but there is 0% chance they’re catching everyone) for a degree.

The only way to be sure that I know of is to ask questions in-person. They don’t have to be absurd, just things that you should be able to answer if you understand fundamentals, like “describe the differences between a binary tree and a B-tree,” or “describe the fetch-execute cycle.”
by trollbridge | 2025-04-08 11:54:06+00:00
Standard workflow in Brazil:

- You need to buy something from person XZ, whether an individual, small business, or huge business.

- XZ sends you an invoice (including relevant taxes).

- You pay the invoice. XZ knows you’ve paid.

- At year end you can download all your invoices, including any taxes already paid, for doing your taxes. (Brazil taxes make American taxation look simple.)

Standard workflow in America:

- “Do you want cash, mail a check, or PayPal/Venmo/Cashapp?”

- “Umm do PayPal but friends and family please… also it’s at my wife’s email that still has her maiden name”

- Zero detail on invoice (maybe a receipt printed on thermal paper or a random email) which you lose by tax time
by MrBuddyCasino | 2025-04-08 11:54:37+00:00
I suspect the main reason isn't just strictly economical. If you are Google or some such you can probably compensate by building smart software around commodity hardware, but most companies simply can't. Even if they have boatloads of money (banking, insurance) and can hire expensive talent, they simply can't successfully complete such an undertaking because they don't have it in their DNA, and management isn't incentivised to take on such a risky project.

In this case they will just use a mainframe, even it isn't cheaper in the long run.
by mhluongo | 2025-04-08 11:54:40+00:00
> Cryptocurrencies don't stand a chance.

Does it work internationally? Does it send USD as well, or only the real?

If it solves th same problems, why is Brazil considering banning self-custodial USD stablecoins? And why has there been an ongoing discussion about launching mBRL, and stablecoin pegged to the real?

https://www.pymnts.com/cryptocurrency/2024/brazil-considers-...
by pjmlp | 2025-04-08 11:55:00+00:00
> And there is no OS I'm aware of that will threaten Unix's dominance any time soon.

Depends on the point of view, and what computing models we are talking about.

While iDevices and Android have UNIX like bottom layer, the userspace has nothing to do with UNIX, developed in a mix of Objective-C, Swift, Java, Kotlin and C++.

There is no UNIX per se on game consoles, and even on Orbit OS, there is little of it left.

The famous Arduino sketches are written in C++ not C.

Windows, dominant in games industry to the point Valve failed to attract developers to write GNU/Linux games, and had to come up with Proton instead, it is not UNIX, the old style Win32 C code has been practically frozen since Windows XP, with very few additions, as since Windows Vista it became heavily based on C++ and .NET code.

macOS while being UNIX certified, the userspace that Apple cares about, or NeXT before the acquisition, has very little to do with UNIX and C, rather Objective-C, C++ and Swift.

On the cloud native space, with managed runtimes on application containers or serverless, the exact nature of the underlying kernel or type 1 hypervisor is mostly irrelevant for application developers.