MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by panick21_ | 2025-04-04 21:45:44+00:00
You are just repeating the same old story, that was pushed by Waimar and Nazi propaganda, that has long been overturned by modern scholarship.

Germans didn't love authoritarianism. Well over half the population voted Communist, Social democrat or with the center party. And usually far more, only in the middle of massive economic depression did the Nazis gain ground. Arguable the communist are 'authoritarians' but they don't think of themselves that way. And many who did vote for the Nazis weren't authoritarians either. Germany had the largest social democratic movement in the world.

The whole 'bled the country dry with reparations' is just weimar/nazi propaganda. Germany reparations were not that extreme, and specially when you compare on what reparations Germany forced on its enemies. Germany could heave paid the reparations without much issue. All the claims that poor little Germany couldn't handle it is Waimar propaganda that the Nazis continued and intensified. Somehow they can spend 20+ of GDP on building a military, but the reparations are somehow impossible.

> Nazi figures like Goebbels who was constantly broke, struggling to pay bills and ranted about financial enslavement of his people.

What if I told you that there are poor people in all nations? And people struggle in lots of place. Germany in 1920 did better then most nations on the plant. And Goebbles was likely in the Top 1 of global population. And you are literally quoting the propaganda minister, of course that is the impression he wants to give.

> The excessive treatment made them see themselves as freedom fighters. Of course, that's not what people are taught in school in Britain or France, it's an inconvenient narrative.

Except that's exactly what people are thought in school. The whole 'extreme reparations' nonsense is the standard view. Its only in the last couple decades that this was seriously questioned by economists and historians.
by tlogan | 2025-04-04 21:46:00+00:00
I recall that the GOP once introduced a bill requiring congressional approval for any changes to tariffs. I believe it was proposed sometime around 2015—or perhaps even earlier, around 2005. I’m not entirely sure of the exact date. What I do remember is that Democrats strongly opposed the bill at the time, as they were generally supportive of tariffs during that period.

Now, interestingly, the GOP has shifted to being largely pro-tariff—except for a few staunch free-market conservatives like Rand Paul.

Strange world …
by alabastervlog | 2025-04-04 21:46:03+00:00
> What would the best possible version of this policy look like if it were smart?

It depends extremely on what your actual goals are, but if we suppose the goal is to increase US manufacturing capacity and economic independence with minimal pain, you'd enact this on a time-table over a period of years, after building enough support across the political spectrum to make it look like this policy will be essentially, if perhaps with some occasional tweaks, be maintained across administrations for some time. You'd also probably not significantly tariff the whole world, at any point.

The biggest problem with this approach is investor confidence. It's hard to sign on the dotted line to spend billions building factories when it's difficult to say with any certainty that these tariffs will still be around by the end of the year, let alone in five years. This was doomed to be way more painful than necessary when he started flip-flopping on this over the last couple months, regardless of whether it's even fundamentally any sort of a good idea.

If the goal's to replace large portions of income tax, as has been suggested by some including by Trump, uh... the math just don't work even with a drastically smaller federal government, it's nonsense, there's no "best possible" version there.
by klipklop | 2025-04-04 21:46:24+00:00
Well I mean destroy and seized in a generic sense. I am wording it poorly, but Germany lost a massive amount of industrial capacity post WW1. In the treaty of Versailles, Germany had to make massive concessions.

"The treaty stripped Germany of 65,000 km2 (25,000 sq mi) of territory and 7 million people."[1]

They also specifically lost coal and iron rich areas to pay back France for destroying theirs.

[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Versailles
by jfengel | 2025-04-04 21:46:30+00:00
Which is to say: the market hasn't yet fully priced in the effects of the tariffs. It will continue to fall until people have accepted that the tariffs are here to stay.

After that it could level off. Or continue to fall, if there are knock-on effects that haven't yet been priced in.

(Or, I suppose, a bunch of manufacturing could spring up in the US, superior to the rest of the world, giving us whole new export markets and pushing the Dow into six figures. Let's find out!)
by al_borland | 2025-04-04 21:47:02+00:00
I think there was a notification or some kind of banner on the app. I can’t remember exactly. Sadly I also don’t remember the circumstances of the migration… if I did it, or it happened for me.

It was my work laptop, which I only have so much control over, so I’m remain fairly detached from the administration for my own sanity.
by zoky | 2025-04-04 21:48:10+00:00
That’s a pretty broad statement to make given that of the seven bestselling video game franchises of all time (Mario, Tetris, Call of Duty, Pokémon, GTA, Minecraft, and FIFA) only one (Call of Duty) is a realistic simulation, one (GTA) could be best described as a totally unrealistic simulation, one (FIFA) is a simulation of an actual game, and the rest are a mix of abstract fantasy and/or pure puzzles.
by taylodl | 2025-04-04 21:48:12+00:00
But they weren't unresponsive to the actual needs of their voters. Biden was one of the most successful presidents in US history, but in this Republican-led post-factual world facts don't matter. The blame for that rests solely on US citizens. They've allowed themselves to be lulled into the fantasy that the party will continue on and on regardless of reality. Well, the party is over.
by thyristan | 2025-04-04 21:48:35+00:00
I'll bite as well.

There is a difference between anti-Zionism and antisemitism. The former is condemning a land-grab because of some 2000 year old claim. The latter is hating Jews because they are Jews. There is a world of difference there.

The forefathers of everyone in Europe, with very few exceptions, occupied a different strip of land 2000 years ago and were driven out by romans, goths, huns, germans or whomever. Most pieces of land changed hands a dozen times or more. Should we now rearrange all the maps and revert to our 2000 year old original national lands and identities? Why 2000 years, why not 500, 5000 or 10000? The maps looked different in those periods as well.
by sorcerer-mar | 2025-04-04 21:48:41+00:00
It's always interesting when you see a new meme emerging from the rightwing information wormhole into the open internet. This week's must be "NGO" used as some type of slur.

Anyway, the economy was rocking under Biden, we had the largest investments in manufacturing in decades (the advanced kind, not mud production), record low unemployment, stonks going up, etc.

Inflation is pretty much the only issue that mattered, which was a global phenomenon that America navigated better than anyone else, and there's almost nothing to say about it. Well, you can lie and say that you'll reduce prices on day one, despite having no mechanism to do so, which I suppose is the real takeaway: Dems should blatantly lie more.
by j_bum | 2025-04-04 21:49:09+00:00
> To hit 87 percent on the original ARC-AGI test, o3 spent roughly 14 minutes per puzzle and, by my calculations, may have required hundreds of thousands of dollars in computing and electricity

> the bot came up with more than 1,000 possible answers per grid before selecting a final submission.

Yeah, AGI is right around the corner… /s
by yieldcrv | 2025-04-04 21:49:25+00:00
Many countries have blanket global tariffs to make their own industries more competitive

We ignored them

Now we are doing it and yes it upsets the world order

There is no precedent where this has been beneficial for the US, but we can try again. The last time it was tried was 1930, and our fortunes vastly changed since then

The incentive is for entrepreneurially minded people to try to provide services in the US and fix the supply chain here. This theoretically means more people employed and more people able to afford the prices of things produced here. Keeps velocity of money in the economy high.

We will learn how resilient a coalition of other countries are, as they try to only trade with each other

A smarter version of this policy would be country by country and industry by industry negotiations. But, given that some countries are dropping their own blanket tariffs, and others like Vietnam already coming to the negotiating table, time will tell.
by steveBK123 | 2025-04-04 21:49:36+00:00
It's the constant playbook of the trump explainer/apologists:

* He's just being bombastic

* It's just a negotiation tool

* Sure he's doing it but it's going to be a narrow policy

* Fine its broad but it's just temporary

* Yeah its broad and permanent but it won't be too harmful

* Actually it's a great idea and he's smart for doing it
by selimthegrim | 2025-04-04 21:49:56+00:00
Buddy I promise you I live in a much redder state than you and I didn’t give up in the last 10 years and neither should you. That being said, I do plan on moving to a swing state by 2026 and voting. If you think two or three votes in the house is like the seventh seal, I don’t know what to tell you. You sound like my roommate in 2016 who busted in the door the night of the election saying that trans people they knew on forums had decided to kill themselves and I snapped at him they should at least wait until all the votes are counted and the electoral college was finished. I would rather take my cues from the two black men walking down the street in front of my house the next day with one of them saying to the other they’d survived 400 years of this and they’d survive Trump too.
by adverbly | 2025-04-04 21:50:07+00:00
If this was the real reason then wouldn't we see countries matching import tariffs with export tariffs? Sharing revenues on a percentage of the flow of goods into the US 50/50 would at least be a more sustainable geopolitically. It would be a collaborative resolution in some sense.

Instead, we are seeing countries match with import tariffs in the other direction, and a deterioration of global trust.

I don't think most countries actually want to balance bilateral trade. You can get a hint of this by the fact that the calculation that the US is using right now to determine the tariff rate puts a floor of 10% tariff. If they were truly committed to balancing bilateral trade then you would have expected them to actually have added export tariffs to any countries where the US had a trade surplus. Instead they gave a 10% import tariff still. I'm not sure I've seen any explanation for this 10%.
by fidotron | 2025-04-04 21:50:19+00:00
One of the great oddities of this whole episode is watching people that have complained about unfettered free markets for years or decades suddenly become latter day Milton Friedman absolutists. Being of the libertarian side of things it has been deeply strange watching profoundly protectionist countries suddenly preaching the importance of the free trade they have been busy obstructing.

While the world swings from one authoritarian brand to another it does feel like a lonely place here for those of us that just want less intervention in everything.
by mtlmtlmtlmtl | 2025-04-04 21:50:49+00:00
It might not exist in the spectrum, does that mean it doesn't exist? You're arguing and conflating two different things here. On the one hand, you're implicitly arguing that a colour can't exist unless it corresponds to a singular frequency of light, which I've already argued against. This is no more meaningful than arguing that tables and chairs are mental constructs because it's all quarks and electrons at the end of the day. Emergent properties exist and can have causal effects, most philosophers and scientists are in agreement about this.

The other is that a qualia or the mental experience of seeing purple is the same thing as perceiving purple as distinct from other colours in a physical object. I'm not talking about the qualia. In fact, I hate the concept of qualia, because whenever it's introduced into philosophical discussions, the discussion devolves into epicycles of meaningsless discussion of definitions and nomenclature and ends up going nowhere.

No, the purple was there. You say all that was there was some chemicals that only reflects certain wavelengths. I say this is what defines the emergent physical property we call the colour purple. You say electrons and quarks, I say tables and chairs. Both are accurate, and certainly not in conflict.

You might say, so how is this distinct from qualia? Well, for the qualia of seeing purple, there is no way even in principle to decide whether my qualia is the same as your qualia. But I can still look at a red onion and tell you it's purple, and you likely would agree unless you're colour blind. So this property of purple is, unlike a qualia, objective, not subjective.
by indemnity | 2025-04-04 21:51:01+00:00
My day job is soul destroying chasing down JIRA tickets, hours long cross time zone coordination calls, tedious documentation writing, and 10% of the time, if I’m lucky, a little bit of code. It affords my family a great lifestyle, but to preserve my sanity, I have to have little side projects. In the last three months I have: - Built a beastly water cooled SFF (small form factor) desktop PC in the FormD T1 case (9950X3D, RTX 4090).

- Really went hard into learning NixOS and nix to manage my environments across nixOS servers and Linux/Windows/macOS development machines

- Built a personal project to replace my usage of healthchecks.io with my own single executable Rust API server with embedded admin UI (learning React/Vite)

- Completely rebuilt my home network from scratch, redoing wiring, improving WiFi coverage with new APs, maxing out home network performance

- Switched to zed.dev with embedded Claude 3.5 Sonnet to speed up my learning and get me unblocked when working on something unfamiliar The freedom to over engineer the shit out of something, is the outlet I need to be calm about having to compromise a lot in my day job!
by AlotOfReading | 2025-04-04 21:51:02+00:00
Let's say you want to bring back semiconductor manufacturing. It seems counterproductive to start with immediate blanket tariffs that include the machines necessary to fabricate semiconductors, where no domestic alternatives exist. Yet that's exactly what's happening. Previous policies would have used long lists of exemptions, carefully crafted tariff schedules, and other policies to try and minimize collateral damage. These tariffs do not.
by mmooss | 2025-04-04 21:51:31+00:00
> Microsoft has always been company that is very good at building software compared their competition at the time.

I have never, ever heard that. (Edit: Name such software today.)

> Their office productivity software, for example, is what made Windows popular (Windows is useless without apps).

Completely false. Windows was already a monopoly, and the US government successfully sued Microsoft for using their Windows monopoly to leverage sales for Office. They told manufacturers: If you want Windows (which was essential) for the computer, you must pay for an Office license too.

Where do you get this stuff or why are you posting it?
by i_am_proteus | 2025-04-04 21:52:12+00:00
>Chollet, a French computer scientist and one of the industry’s sharpest skeptics

I feel like this description really buries the lede on Chollet's expertise. (For those who don't know, he's the creator of and lead contributor[0] to Keras)

[0]https://github.com/keras-team/keras/graphs/contributors
by snozolli | 2025-04-04 21:52:28+00:00
I don't know if this will answer your question, but the last episode of the Planet Money podcast addressed tariffs:

https://www.npr.org/2025/04/02/1242229719/planet-money-the-c...

IMO, tariffs are bad for the economy, but could be great for workers and the middle class. Regardless, implementing them this was is absolutely nuts.

China got our manufacturing because they didn't care about pollution. Now, they've developed cleaner industrial methods and built out fantastic infrastructure (e.g. massive industrial complexes right next to shipping ports). Meanwhile, we did nothing and we're a good ten to twenty years behind assuming perfect infrastructure development starting today with tariffs that are immediately in effect.

Combine that with the fact that infrastructure development in the US costs many multiples more than other developed nations, and you have a recipe for complete failure.
by darksaints | 2025-04-04 21:52:29+00:00
> That requires some initial assumptions that simply aren't true.

There are certainly assumptions, but those assumptions are reasonable in nearly every possibly scenario the US has ever encountered.

> Tariffs can and do serve a vital role to protect a country from one with lower standards of living

Protect how? Protect them from lower priced goods? Sorry, but this "idea" originates from mercantilist thought and has been thoroughly dismantled and discredited. Even when one country is less wealthy and less productive, both countries benefit from expanded trade. This is Comparative Advantage...literally Econ 101.

Economics is a social science and has a lot of problems with things being claimed as settled science when they aren't, but this is actually one of them. You'd have a hard time finding any living economist, liberal or conservative, who would agree with you.

> (eg taken to an extreme, consider trade between county A where slavery is illegal and country B where it isn't)

I would hope that in this extreme, we wouldn't use tariffs as a tool, but rather full trade embargo. Because it stops being an economic argument, but rather a human rights argument.

Regardless, reducing or eliminating trade with nations that accept slavery would be a reduction in economic output. It would just be one with a price that we should be willing to pay.

I'd love to see any sort of human rights justification for Tariffs against Canada though.
by mindslight | 2025-04-04 21:52:56+00:00
You do realize this "debt" is denominated in the currency that the US itself controls, and can create and destroy at will, right? You cannot analyze this with the logic of household finances. The debt owed to bond holders is our and other countries continuing to buy into the American system. And the "debt" owed to other government agencies (including the Fed) is nothing more than a political martingale, to support the Republicans' kayfabe "fiscal responsibility" of the past forty years, where they sabotaged investments in our society so they could give away the wealth to banksters instead.
by bloomingeek | 2025-04-04 21:53:15+00:00
I've always been kind of meh on Yoko breaking up the Beatles. I was in junior high when it all went down, so for me there wasn't much info to be had to think one way or another. These artists live their lives like they want, as do I, so it is what it is. (sorry)

However, I missed not having new music from them sorely! AM radio was the main medium and the Beatles were on a lot, which I loved. In a parallel universe, great bands, which I get to choose, will be prevented from fighting and hating each other until I've had enough time loving their music, which they will continue to drop, until an acceptable retirement age. There.
by lap5j | 2025-04-04 21:53:21+00:00
Alembic | San Francisco, United States | Full-time | Onsite

Alembic applies cutting-edge algorithms and composite AI solutions to provide enterprises with a new marketing intelligence platform.

We’re particularly focused on hiring for these roles this month: 1. A Senior Sales Engineer to help onboard new enterprise customers 2. Applied AI engineers with ML or data science backgrounds 3. Senior Data Engineers

We’re backed by leading tech luminaries and innovators including WndrCo, founded by DreamWorks founder Jeffrey Katzenberg, Jensen Huang, Joe Montana, and many more.

https://getalembic.com/careers
by bbor | 2025-04-04 21:53:23+00:00
It's not filling in the blanks that's impressive, it's meaningfully combining them all into an objectively unique narrative, building upon those blanks at length.

Definitions are always up for debate on instrumental grounds, but I'm dubious of any definition of "creative" that excludes truly unique yet meaningful artifacts. The only thing past that is ineffable stuff, which is inherently not very helpful for scientific discussion.
by baranul | 2025-04-04 21:53:47+00:00
This thread literally meets the definition of self-promotion. So no, don't think the characterization is unfair.

If your programming language had a different name, then I would agree, but it doesn't. Many will assume that C3 is the next iteration of C2 and that it's outdated, despite the fact that C2 is still in development.
by mikestew | 2025-04-04 21:54:38+00:00
It can be that easy, but you are gambling. If the market turns for whatever reason, then all your positions go near to zero.

They’re options, they can go all the way to zero, not “near to zero” (which is what happens to the majority of options contracts regardless). That said, with options you leverage a lot more shares than buying outright, so the risk can be smaller. And if OP has any sense, they’ve unloaded those positions already and made some serious bank.
by steveBK123 | 2025-04-04 21:54:50+00:00
Agreed and its not just "prices will be higher". You can pretty reasonably expect goods shortages as the entire global economy tries to re-adjust supply chains to more tariff friendly domiciles.

Of course everyone will be doing so at the same time, competing for the same finite factor capacity.

For example - If your Nike right now for example, you might be winding down Vietnam production volume and trying to spin up more volume in existing country footprints, while also trying to find new factories there as well. And then those suppliers will be looking for new suppliers for shoestrings and metal eyelets and 100 other things. And those suppliers will be searching for new suppliers of cotton, polyester, steel, cardboard, etc.

There is zero chance this happens without cost AND disruption! So things can get worse before they get worse!
by Nextgrid | 2025-04-04 21:55:13+00:00
Bad reviews are often moderated away and refund requests are stonewalled (and few people know about chargebacks so that isn't factored in). It is easier for the platform to acquire guests than hosts, so the platform takes the side of hosts.

Edit: at least that was the situation a couple of years ago. A host below now reports that the situation has changed and they take the side of the guests; however, either way it's open to abuse no matter which side they take.

The issue is that in a marketplace where both sides can be dishonest, the only way to ensure quality is to do spot checks by trusted actors (aka company employees) where the penalties for failing such a check are dissuasive enough that it becomes more profitable to play by the rules.

This is similar to how law enforcement is supposed to operate - the reason the penalty for theft (for example) is more than merely returning the stolen items is that since law enforcement can't observe everyone all at once, the penalty needs to be enough of a deterrent to make the bad behavior unprofitable overall, to discourage it even in cases where law enforcement isn't there to witness it and enforce said law.