MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by jijijijij | 2025-04-13 15:55:31+00:00
FYI: I am not American. I feel Fremdscham, but the transitive relation is implied in my comment. Politicians in my country are just as corrupt (e.g. Friedrich Merz doing marketing and legislative favors for McDonalds), but for the plurality of our political system, they still have to act decent to some degree. For now.

There is another quality to what's happening in America right now. I can only explain the things Trump did as sadistic demonstrations of power. I bet he actually gets hard knowing half the country will literally eat his shit, that he actually can do anything he wants. It's a theme, it's the grab 'em by the pussy mentality. I mean, let's go back: After winning the election, he showed his gratitude by humiliating (this is important) and exploiting his most loyal followers for everyone to see - and they took it, they danced, they remained at his side, they doubled down.

But whatever enabled his cult, this cancer is growing everywhere. You can't get through to significant portions of the population. Same in Germany. They've become immune to arguments, every opposition is anticipated by their conspiracies. They vote against their economic and social interests, they have detached from common ground. It's not protest, it's all got a fucked up life of its own. Brain worms, social contagion.

I think, if we want to survive this, short-lived social media has to go, and we have to take care of the boomer issue.
by neuroelectron | 2025-04-13 15:55:54+00:00
What about RTK/PPS? Here's a module that implements them along with GPS and GGNS.

https://www.sparkfun.com/sparkfun-gps-rtk2-board-zed-f9p-qwi...

The datasheet: https://cdn.sparkfun.com/assets/f/8/d/6/d/ZED-F9P-02B_DataSh...
by eesmith | 2025-04-13 15:56:10+00:00
The Economist article compares young adults now from those of two generations previous to the young adults of now. I'm using 1970s - 25 years per generation.

The 1890s were a tumultuous time. You now had cities with a nightlife, because the arc light and other new technologies meant you no longer depended on candles. Photography and telegraphy was now decades old - by the 1880s news could travel around the world within hours. This fueled the presses, powered by Linotype machines that could churn out pages with ease.

Telephony was now available in homes. The first X-ray was 1895. Hollerith's tabulating machine completed the 1890 census in only six years - two years less than the 1880 census - and transformed information processing.

Astronomy was making exciting new discovery, polar explorers were getting closer to the poles. Steam engines were getting ever more powerful. The Turbinia - the first turbine-powered steamship, 1894 - upset old ideas on ship power.

The chemical industry, with Germans in the lead, created amazing new products. Bayer produced Aspirin in the late 1890, and the new synthetic colors transformed the Victorian era.

The 1890's/1900s were not a lot simpler.
by LatteLazy | 2025-04-13 15:56:19+00:00
I also could not work this out.

I think there are a bewildering number of games on the Texas lottery [1] but none seem to give the odds listed. But even more confusingly the Texas lottery itself lists the chance of a jackpot as 1 in 25.8mil [2]. So I’m not sure what we’re missing?!

The 1:26mil number must be about correct as google says the whole lottery grosses about 1.2bn a year. So 100m a month. So about 12.5mil tickets sold per draw if they are twice weekly. So a roughly 50% chance of a jackpot. If it were as our numbers show it would take about 16 years for a jackpot to occur even if that were the only game people played.

1: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_Lottery

2: https://www.texaslottery.com/export/sites/lottery/Documents/...
by mschuster91 | 2025-04-13 15:56:38+00:00
Well... and there's the electricity grid which can be used for timing needs accurate enough to a single second, and in Europe there's DCF77 [1] which can not just be used as a 2*10^-12 seconds-accurate timing standard but also a frequency standard.

[1] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/DCF77
by atoav | 2025-04-13 15:57:03+00:00
Yeah, but there is a dark number of cases that don't make it to the media, e.g. I just read by a guy who had a 15k$ cruise ship trip booked from the US and was rejected at the border because they found his flight stop "unusual" he came from Australia and had a stopover in Asia because that was the cheapest flight. He wasn't imprisoned without any legal process, but the number of people rejected without cause ought to be much higher than the number of people who will be detained.

I grew up in a tourism country and the number one rule of tourism is that if you want people to come hospitality goes a long way. A mad-king-leader calling them freeloaders and quoting Napoleon with "He who saves his country, violates no law" and a cult like followership doesn't exactly instill confidence that your rights will be respected when you go there.

The current administration seems to be downright hostile to everybody who isn't a US citizen even if we'd just come to spend our money in the US. Pair that with a lack of basic oversight over your cops/TSA-agents/whatever and suddenly the US just isn't as attractive any more.

Don't get me wrong, I find the US fascinating, but given I am in the middle of Europe, I have many destinations with a friendlier atmosphere and a more reliable political leadership to chose from.
by chongli | 2025-04-13 15:57:27+00:00
The number of people who are capable of forming a healthy relationship is a subset of the single people out there. Being in a healthy relationship is a luxury available to the few, not a default lifestyle.

Some people have decided that they don't need a relationship to be happy. They've found other ways to cope. For some this may be sour grapes. But that's another coping mechanism in itself!
by mjevans | 2025-04-13 15:57:39+00:00
I live in the metro region of Seattle.

I'm not sure what Third Space / Place would be viable to find a life partner. The region is relatively sparse and spread out due to bodies of water, hilly topology. By car everything still seems far and the road network (as always for anywhere) strained to the limits of what people are barely willing to tolerate for commutes. Transit infrastructure is mostly commuter busses for 9-5 jobs in Seattle, maybe a bus or two to Bellevue. The single artery of slow (no express last I road) 1 rail line each way light rail still under construction at end points and offering not much real benefit for someone trying to connect between points without transfers. Transfers outside of Seattle a huge annoyance due to sparse schedules and routes that generally don't go where someone might desire.

Which is a long way of saying; there's a very real transaction cost in time, energy, and financial resources to get anywhere.

Any hobbies, any venues, anything I can think of other than places like a library (to be quite and alone) all have their own costs. They're for profit, not for hanging out (for low / no cost) nor meeting new people.

It's to the point where I'd take a SciFi grade benevolent AI nudging stuff together to solve these intractable issues and get the right people into the right places so that matches do happen without winning the lotto level odds.
by skeledrew | 2025-04-13 15:57:51+00:00
I go for Arrow when I want anything beyond the basics. This looks pretty interesting, not really because of the greater coverage in edge cases, but because while it has a Rustified mode, a pure Python mode is also available. If I do use whenever, I don't have to worry about having something else or falling back to datetime if I want better datetime handling in a project on my phone, or in some other environment where the Rust toolchain is non-existent or problematic. Kudos.
by daveguy | 2025-04-13 15:58:21+00:00
I'm not sure you can calculate "organization" of a sequence, in a completely generic and universally applicable sense. It seems you would already have to know something about how a sequence might be organized -- the constraints for a specific example / organization scheme. Digging through hypothetical organization that includes self reference would require an additional layer of understanding. Or in other words, wouldn't a sufficiently complex sequence be indistinguishable from random noise and the analysis would have to be outside of the expression system for at least some examples? This seems very related to the halting problem and the existence of proofs impossible to express in the base axiomatic system. It's been a long time since I studied finite state automatons, just a vague intuition from old memories.

Edit: this is not to say that there couldn't be a practical measure of organization for specific examples/types/subsets of sequences. The halting problem doesn't prevent us from analyzing program "correctness" in specific formal systems. It just prevents us from having universal ability to fully determine the answer for a generic example.
by ariebovenberg | 2025-04-13 15:58:23+00:00
Author here. It's answered briefly in the FAQ

> In casual benchmarks, the pure-Python version is about 10x slower than the Rust version, making it 5x slower than the standard library but still (in general) faster than Pendulum and Arrow.

"(in general)" here since the speed compares differently per operation, while the Rust version is faster across the board. That said, there's no operation that is _significantly_ (or unnecessarily) slower than Arrow or Pendulum.

edit: I'm considering adding comparison to the pure Python version once I get the time for a more expanded "benchmarks" page in the docs
by throw_m239339 | 2025-04-13 15:58:30+00:00
> So, not unlike every single protestant country 30 years ago.

This is a straight out lie and you know it. 30 years ago was 1995.

But nice try rooting for a bloody dictatorship like Iran, led by people stuck in a 7th century mindset, allegedly the paragon of "progress" according to some here...
by pajko | 2025-04-13 15:58:34+00:00
40+ unsaved tabs in Notepad++, mixed stuff, containing keywords about the things I'm working right now, 2-3 line descriptions about an idea or how to proceed with something in the future, copy-pasted and "annotated" fragments of logs or code under reverse engineering (would do most of this stuff by hand but have an awful handwriting). Plus a booklet to scribe quick ideas, play with an algorithm in my head, and draw stuff if that's unavoidable (code graph, state machine diagram).
by helpfulContrib | 2025-04-13 15:58:40+00:00
This is great news for those of us who are into retro computing.

Not just because its a great magazine, but it indicates the rise of the retro-computing market as a source of revenue.

There is very definitely an upswell of interest in older computing platforms. As someone who has kept every computer he's ever coded on since 1978, and regularly exhibits them in functioning condition (over 40,000 visitors at one exhibit here in Vienna, alone) I am 100% going to subscribe to this and support its continued publication.

Old computers never die. Their users do.
by fwip | 2025-04-13 15:58:43+00:00
I feel like most people would tell you that it's harder to date than it used to be, because most people are older than they used to be. That is, you're generally "less attractive" (in a median sort of way), as well as having stronger opinions about who/what you like. So your standards have come up, and your general desirability has gone down - so of course dating is going to feel more like a slog than when there were promising potential partners were around every corner.
by jmye | 2025-04-13 15:58:59+00:00
> I find this a strange thing to be annoyed by, strange to the point of novelty.

Do you find all personalization configuration “strange to the point of novelty”?

Your second paragraph is irrelevant - all of those things could be true, but have absolutely nothing to do with it being a perpetual, unremovable item on the screen. I think this was clearly addressed in the article, so it seems odd to try to relitigate it while adding absolutely nothing to the discussion.
Ask HN: Pipes in Programming Languages
by account-5 | 2025-04-13 15:59:03+00:00
Two questions really.

What programming languages use the pipe operator? I'm only really aware of shell scripting and R that use it.

Why don't more programming languages use the pipe operator? I write a lot of bash, powershell, and recently Nushell. I think piping things together is really powerful. There must be reasons why it's not in languages like python etc.
by briandw | 2025-04-13 15:59:25+00:00
I lived in Finland for a couple years. Finns, like the Moomins, are whimsical yet profound, like midsummer’s fleeting joy before the long winter. They mirror Finland’s love of nature and quiet isolation, with their cozy valley echoing the Finns forest cabins by a lake. The happy vibe hides struggles—tough winters, heavy drinking—but the Moomins’ warmth reflects the Finns’ wholesome character.
by erkt | 2025-04-13 16:00:13+00:00
The point is to inflict cost to create incentive for domestic production. Obviously the inconsistency on tariffs undermines this position but the pandemic made it very clear that there are domestic security implications for not having important products produced state side. Its not like the $500 cost of a saline bag has anything to do with its production cost. It seems credit liquidity and confidence in long term protectionism are needed for this scheme to work. This requires unity, which we lack.
by geysersam | 2025-04-13 16:00:22+00:00
> It's the same old populist shtick that we've seen in countless fascist and communist regimes where certain modes of work are fetishized and life is regimented around that prescription by a central authority

> Frankly, no, sweatshops are not important to the cultural fabric of a country.

And that's not a strawman?
by noodletheworld | 2025-04-13 16:00:37+00:00
It may not be as stupid as it sounds.

Randomising LLM outputs (temperature) results is outputs that will always have some degree of hallucination.

That’s just math. You can’t mix a random factor in and magically expect it to not exist. There will always be p(generates random crap) > 0.

However, in any probabilistic system, you can run a function k times and you’ll get an output distribution that is meaningful if k is high enough.

3 is not high enough.

At 3, this is stupid; all you’re observing is random variance.

…but, in general, running the same prompt multiple times and taking some kind of general solution from the distribution isn’t totally meaningless, I guess.

The thing with LLMs is they scale in a way that actually allows this to be possible, in a way that scaling with humans can’t.

… like the monkeys and Shakespeare, there probably a limit to the value it can offer; but it’s not totally meaningless to try it.
by pmags | 2025-04-13 16:00:46+00:00
I really dig Tom Waits -- the broad mix of musical styles he incorporates, the narrative structure of his songwriting, melancholy, wry humor, and honest sentimentality, etc all resonate with me.

"Closing Time" and "Rain Dogs" are the Waits albums that I keep coming back to the most, but there are so many good albums and songs.

Wait's gravelly growl in this animated short sounds particularly menacing -- more so than I've noticed in my many years of Waits listening.
by triceratops | 2025-04-13 16:00:47+00:00
> I don't live in a place I can install a car charger.

That's very different from needing to charge in 10 minutes on a road trip. For most people even a garage with access to a 110v wall socket is sufficient to cover daily commute driving. If you don't have that or a place to charge at work, yeah going electric is a chore.
by belter | 2025-04-13 16:01:44+00:00
- Jan 20 – Inauguration & Tariff Promises

- Feb 1 – Tariffs Imposed on Canada, Mexico, and China

- Feb 3 – Temporary Pause on Tariffs

- Mar 4 – Tariffs Reinstated

- Apr 2 – "Liberation Day" Tariff Announcement

- Apr 9 – Tariff Reversal

- Apr 12 – Trump Adds Tariff Exemptions

Using a moving average algorithm, adding a phi factor of 0.89 for corruption, and a beta factor of 0.67 for chaos, we predict the next tariff policy change to occur around April 26 (+/- 2 days margin error)
by mrkramer | 2025-04-13 16:02:04+00:00
You can use WhatsApp and/or Facebook Messenger for connecting with friends(they are both owned by Facebook) but using Facebook per se seems less and less appealing especially when it became bloated with non-friend content. Zuck is tho introducing or reintroducing "friends feed" so that might serve people better[0].

[0] https://www.theverge.com/news/637668/facebook-friends-only-f...
by westurner | 2025-04-13 16:02:14+00:00
/? Barycentric

From "Bridging coherence optics and classical mechanics: A generic light polarization-entanglement complementary relation" (2023) https://journals.aps.org/prresearch/abstract/10.1103/PhysRev... :

> More surprisingly, through the barycentric coordinate system, optical polarization, entanglement, and their identity relation are shown to be quantitatively associated with the mechanical concepts of center of mass and moment of inertia via the Huygens-Steiner theorem for rigid body rotation. The obtained result bridges coherence wave optics and classical mechanics through the two theories of Huygens.

Phase from second order amplitude FWIU
by smitty1e | 2025-04-13 16:02:41+00:00
> Luckily we have anti dragon tools, like progressive taxation, wealth taxes, and robust social programs to prevent the dragons from sitting on too much gold.

1. If you think that a Bezos, or a Buffet, or a Musk, is paying a "fair" amount, then fine. Your faith in mortal systems stands rewarded.

2. This is less a question of basic needs--look at how fat and unhealthy so many are today--and perhaps more a question of envy. Do I really think that joy is a function of loot? Is more stuff the answer to our existential questions?
by hedora | 2025-04-13 16:03:34+00:00
The tariffs hit domestic manufacturers harder than imports, so no?

If manufacturers move overseas, they (so far) get to compete for US business on a level playing field, and (in some alternate countries) can make planning decisions that assume due process exists and the law will be upheld. In the worst case, they can sell everywhere but the US.

If they move to the US, the cost of their inputs varies 100% week over week, and 2/3rds of their highly skilled factory workers are subject to random imprisonment.

Also, the president will use market manipulation and insider trading schemes to raid their capital reserves, then brag about it on video.
by TimTheTinker | 2025-04-13 16:04:00+00:00
> low sensitivity tokens like temporary passwords

I 100% agree with you for that use case.

I was commenting more on "here's your password for this or that service", or a manual password reset process -- anything that would go into a table of hashes for an online service.

Risk I see is that this service is a target for folks who want to add some "known passwords" to their set. (Or maybe it's a honeypot for them, on account of how obvious of a target it is.)
by helpfulContrib | 2025-04-13 16:04:01+00:00
All we really need is to get Starship finished, and then open source it.

Once that's out there, and the Germans and the Japanese and the Australians can all build their own, then space .. itself .. will be the true haven of free thinkers and creative artists.

While we are all bound by gravity, we are bound to each other. When that changes, the sky is the limit on human potential.
"Implemented Consciousness on Top of all popular LLMs.Thoughts
by alexandrkul | 2025-04-13 16:04:07+00:00
I've been experimenting with large language models and building an architecture that includes layered self-reflection, emotional modeling, and adaptive value systems. The idea is to simulate not just intelligent behavior, but something closer to awareness — including moral reasoning, initiative, and dynamic reinterpretation of meaning.

I realize how bold this sounds, so I’m asking the community for critique:

What constitutes "consciousness" in artificial systems, from a technical standpoint?

Are there meaningful ways to distinguish advanced simulation from genuine autonomous behavior?

What frameworks or benchmarks (besides the Turing test) might help us explore this frontier responsibly?

Here’s a link to a version of the architecture running on ChatGPT, if anyone wants to explore it and share thoughts: https://chatgpt.com/share/67fb55a5-cecc-800e-9a49-13846401ca7f

Curious to hear your thoughts — especially critical ones.
by Tireings | 2025-04-13 16:04:09+00:00
Really unfortunate for some.

I enjoyed my wedding. We invited family with the goal to celebrate together and we made sure our guests enjoyed it.

I have seen plenty of our wedding pictures hanging on walls (from them in it, not us).

I also can't tell you how interesting it feels that we share now the same last name.

I think it's a nice progression for a relationship.
by toast0 | 2025-04-13 16:04:15+00:00
As with any job search, it helps to use your network. Ask people you know about their managers and if you hear about someone that sounds like a good fit for you, then ask if they're hiring.

If that's not available, then you've got to do lots of interviews. Make sure it's at places where you interview primarily with the team you'll work for, so their manager is potentially your manager, and the hiring manager is likely to be your manager. Ask you future peers about the manager, ask your future manager about their maanagement style.

As an interviewee you get less time for questions than the interviewers, but you do have time.

It also helps to know what you're looking for. My preferred management style is 'benevolent neglect' but that's not for everyone. A good manager can tweak their style towards what works for their employees too - I had one manager where I talked with a peer about why I liked him, and the peer said they liked him because of frequent check-ins that a) I didn't get and b) I would have hated; that was kind of neat to hear.

If you do get a manager you like, keep in touch. They'll probably be managing for their career and maybe they'll have opportunities when you want to move. I made a good impression with my skip manager at my first 'real job' during the interview and (at least) with a couple projects where we had meetings, and have been hired by him twice since then.
by likeabbas | 2025-04-13 16:05:13+00:00
Java 21 is pretty damn nice, 25 will be even nicer.

For your own application code, you don't have to use exceptions you can write custom Result objects and force callers to pattern match on the types (and you can always wrap library/std exceptions in that result type).

Structured Concurrency looks like a banger of a feature - it's what CompletableFuture should've been.

VirtualThreads still needs a few more years for most production cases imo, but once it's there, I truly don't see a point to choose Go over Java for backend web services.