MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by captainkrtek | 2025-04-23 21:12:35+00:00
One other use-case I've found effective for it is assisting with API development and defining API specs. For example, I've uploaded API definitions in YAML and previously provided instructions about the API standards I want to impose and to ensure consistency as I build new things, this saves some degree of effort between writing -> linting -> fixing -> linting again if I have it just validate and fix any minor inconsistencies.
by timschmidt | 2025-04-23 21:13:12+00:00
SpaceX's solution with Starship definitely demonstrates how difficult a problem it is. Raptor are the best engines humanity has, all the landing hardware is part of the launch tower to save weight, and those seem to be table stakes. Stoke aerospace has a fantastically genius solution with their regeneratively cooled heatshield / expander cycle aerospike engine. It literally turns the energy you're trying to burn off during re-entry into delta-v in the opposing direction while reducing weight and complexity.
by GeoAtreides | 2025-04-23 21:13:58+00:00
I'm willing to bet it was was done for performance reasons, subtraction is cheaper than float point division. Probably the compiler also has some tricks to optimize this further.

There is absolutely no way this could turn into an infinite loop. It could underflow, but for that to happen angle would have to be less than the 2*pi, therefore exiting the loop.
by amgutier | 2025-04-23 21:14:01+00:00
> Of course, not counting those who just trace 16-th century font without paying a compensation

I can't tell which way you mean this, but that sounds similar to the situation with most public domain musical compositions - the manuscripts may be completely open but a specific typesetting can still under copyright. And like that case, "just" tracing a font / typesetting a composition is still a fair amount of work.
by avar | 2025-04-23 21:14:01+00:00
> Whereas what the 1A actually > states is the exact opposite: > That platform has the right to > ban that user, and the > government is constitutionally > restrained: If the government > were to make a law that forces > this social network to unban > this user, that'd be the 1A > violation.

If I build a bridge and offer it for public use for a toll, and I overhear you saying something I don't like as you travel across in your car, you think the government stepping in if I ban you from traversing the bridge solely for that reason is a 1A violation?

This principle is obvious if I was running a newspaper and printing user-submitted comments. I can have whatever inclusion policy I deem fit, or my own speech would be curtailed.

But this is now being applied by private companies in cases wildly removed from that. Meta er whoever can ban two users having a private conversation on their platform.

It seems to me that the private bridge builder in the example above has a stronger case than these companies in such cases.

Perhaps I overhear that you dislike fast-food, and I only sell billboard space to fast-food companies.

Or perhaps you think that would be just fine, and we just need to close the technological gap of being able to embed hypersensitive microphones into asphalt.
by clucas | 2025-04-23 21:14:30+00:00
You’re misunderstanding the question - he’s asking how Shopify could avoid jurisdiction, not avoid this suit. Jurisdiction is a threshold question before you get to the merits… maybe Shopify did the bad thing, maybe they didn’t, but before we decide that, we need to determine if California law even applies to Shopify.

The author seems to think that there should be some way for Shopify to avoid jurisdiction while still offering services in California, but I don’t really understand why he thinks so.
by smj-edison | 2025-04-23 21:14:38+00:00
But... My local library has a job searching program? I have a friend who's learning masonry at a government sponsored training program? It seems the issue is not that resources don't exist, but that these people don't have the time to use them. So it's unfair to say they don't exist. Rather, it seems they're structured in an unhelpful way for those who are working double jobs, etc.

I see capitalism invoked as a "boogey man" a lot, which fair enough, you can make an emotional argument, but it's not specific enough to actually be helpful in coming up with a solution to help these people.

In fact, capitalism has been the exact thing that has lifted so many out of poverty. Things can be simultaneously bad and also have gotten better over time.

I would argue that the biggest issue is education, but that's another tangent...
by Macha | 2025-04-23 21:14:42+00:00
> In Ireland the creation of a national Irish language TV station is definitely credited with helping keep the language alive, and it is practically the same language. Gaelic language TV in Scotland would also have an audience here, and the two channels might even cooperate in programming.

This is definitely one of these cases where you feel that things that were around in your childhood have been around forever, but things introduced since then are new.

I'd assumed TG4 also dated from the 60s/70s like RTE and was going to comment that the time frames didn't really line up. Turns out it came about in 1996 - still over a decade before the current revival in interest, but much closer in overlap.
by aleph_minus_one | 2025-04-23 21:16:43+00:00
Relevant:

You wouldn't download a car

>https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/piracy-its-a-crime

Also be aware that some people actually consider the real PSA to be a Mandela effect since they consider "You wouldn't download a car" to be the "real, original" text of these PSAs, while in reality this was a popular parody/meme that was made out of the PSA:

> https://www.reddit.com/r/MandelaEffect/comments/113qibd/you_...
by ssl-3 | 2025-04-23 21:17:09+00:00
So maybe the future is to draw a picture, and go from there?

For instance: My modelling abilities are limited. I can draw what I want, with measurements, but I am not a draftsman. I can also explain the concept, in conversational English, to a person who uses CAD regularly and they can hammer out a model in no time. This is a thing that I've done successfully in the past.

Could I just do it myself? Sure, eventually! But my modelling needs are very few and far between. It isn't something I need to do every day, or even every year. It would take me longer to learn the workflow and toolsets of [insert CAD system here] than to just earn some money doing something that I'm already good at and pay someone else to do the CAD work.

Except maybe in the future, perhaps I will be able use the bot to help bridge the gap between a napkin sketch of a widget and a digital model of that same widget. (Maybe like Scotty tried to do with the mouse in Star Trek IV.)

(And before anyone says it: I'm not really particularly interested in becoming proficient at CAD. I know I can learn it, but I just don't want to. It has never been my goal to become proficient at every trade under the sun and there are other skills that I'd rather focus on learning and maintaining instead. And that's OK -- there's lots of other things in life that I will probably also never seek to be proficient at, too.)
by pessimizer | 2025-04-23 21:17:32+00:00
> It is squarely on the shop operator to be compliant - Shopify is just a platform vendor and shoppers are not Shopify customers; rather, they are customers of the shop.

I disagree energetically. If Shopify wants to run a service identifying people between every site that it serves as a backend to, it should ask those people if they want to be included in that. The only alternative to stop the illegal activity otherwise is to print a list of Shopify's customers, and visit (and sue) them one by one in California. Shopify is running the service, and the shop owner probably doesn't even know how it works.

I'd even think that a shop owner sued over this should in turn be able to sue Shopify. If Shopify knows that something it does is not legal in California, it should tell its clients who may do business in California.
by islewis | 2025-04-23 21:18:07+00:00
> Already in anti-trust related to ads, AI is probably in the clear.

"Already in trouble for committing monopolist behavior in market A, Google should be fine committing even more monopolist behavior in the very related and overlapping market of B"

This makes claim makes pretty little sense to me. AI search and Google web search (ads) are already stepping on each other. I see no reason that Google wouldn't be worried about antitrust on AI search if they're worried about antitrust action in general- which they clearly are.
by kristjank | 2025-04-23 21:18:34+00:00
I reread those paragraphs. I find the transformative effect of the email missing from the whole discussion. The end result of the inbox examples is to change some internal information in the mind of the recipient. Agent working within the context of the email has very little to contribute because it does not know the OP's schedule, dinner plans, whether he has time for the walk and talk or if he broke his ankle last week... I'd be personally afraid to have something rummaging in my social interface that can send (and let's be honest, idiots will CtrlA+autoreply their whole inboxes) invites, timetables, love messages etc. in my name. It has too many lemmas that need to be fulfilled before it can be assumed competent, and none of those are very well demonstrated. It's cold fusion technology. Feasible, should be nice if it worked, but it would really be a disappointment if someone were to use it in its current state.
by oofManBang | 2025-04-23 21:19:20+00:00
I don't really get your point. Water isn't necessarily safe now, either. Just like now, you boil water if you are aware of risk. Just like now, people communicated about when to boil, where to gather water, skinning people alive for messing with the water (well that has perhaps improved a little bit), militaries would regularly poison water sources. And of course, you can find people today who willingly take dumb risks for no explicable reason. All of your uncertainty applies just as much to today as it did in the past.

Water has always been, is, and will be uncertain. But there's so much evidence of awareness of this that speculating people didn't drink water is absurd. Not to mention keeping water sources clean gets much harder with high populations we see today—we have roughly the same amount of water that we did before

Btw, you casually ACCEPTED that people drank beer instead of water when we know this is false. Even on ships (as you would know if you clicked through the askhistorians link under the top of the thread) ships did carry (a lot of!) water—it just wasn't listed as rationed unless supplies ran low. This was both drunk directly and added to the beer to produce the gallon allocated.

Ie you might follow the same rhetorical technique to say "why do you beat your wife? Well, the evidence is uncertain.", even if we have clear evidence you don't beat your wife.

You'd really have to find evidence that people explicitly avoided water to make such a claim. In all situations I can think of there was either certainty it was not potable (ie seawater, poisoned well, flooding, etc) and being unable to boil it.
by malfist | 2025-04-23 21:19:50+00:00
If I told you someone went to your bank and demanded the right to setup accounts with permissions to do everything and to have all logging of that users activity disabled, and then a whistleblower pointed out that they downloaded everyone's bank statements, you'd probably be pretty up set.

After all, why do they need unfettered access? Why do they need your bank statements? Why do they need to hide what they're doing with the unfettered access?

That's what's happening here. There is no good explanation other than bad actors
by blutack | 2025-04-23 21:19:51+00:00
It's obviously way too late now but esphome is a very nice easy mode solution for the whole remote upload/logging/server/mqtt/iot widget thing if you don't want to drag in esp-idf. First time bootstrap is via serial/webusb and then it's all OTA.

You can write custom c++ modules for bits they don't have already, although that's pretty rare. Often used with HA but it works fine standalone with MQTT too, and deployment doesn't have to be from a server.

https://esphome.io/
by daxfohl | 2025-04-23 21:19:53+00:00
I'd expect "local MCP servers" will be generally installed as part of something else. Photoshop, or Outlook, or whatever could come with a local MCP server to allow chat clients to automate them. Maybe printer drivers or other hardware would do similar. I don't think there's much reason to install a cloud service MCP server to run locally; you'd just use the one provided in the cloud.
by twalkz | 2025-04-23 21:19:58+00:00
> According to a whistleblower complaint filed last week by Daniel J. Berulis, a 38-year-old security architect at the NLRB, officials from DOGE met with NLRB leaders on March 3 and demanded the creation of several all-powerful “tenant admin” accounts that were to be exempted from network logging activity that would otherwise keep a detailed record of all actions taken by those accounts.

Feels like a pretty good Occam’s razor case… but is there any legitimate reason why one would request this?
by nozzlegear | 2025-04-23 21:20:02+00:00
Rupert Murdoch and Elon Musk are both American citizens. In fact, one of Murdoch's primary reasons for becoming an American citizen in 1985 was to comply with the Communications Act of 1934, which prevented him (or any non-citizen) from owning more than 25% of a broadcasting company.

Here's a piece of history from 1985 that talks about it: https://archive.ph/HlHrx
by mwigdahl | 2025-04-23 21:20:17+00:00
My "wow" moment was when I wrote an internal MCP server so that Claude Code could access our test databases. It was a tiny amount of code, simple to connect up, and immediately gave Claude Code a way to directly validate queries. It's been useful in numerous scenarios since then and got me thinking about additional MCP-based tools it might be nice to have.
by MOARDONGZPLZ | 2025-04-23 21:21:16+00:00
The complaint alleges that DOGE was able to get unlimited-permissions admin accounts that were not subject to logging. They also downloaded external repositories that gave users of those repos lots of different IPs. The complaint further alleges that the DOGE person used the combination of these things to "download... more than 10 gigabytes of data from the agency’s case files, a database that includes reams of sensitive records including information about employees who want to form unions and proprietary business documents."

If this is all true, this is basically hacking sensitive data in the open. We already know the current administration has worked to hobble unions. So putting these things together, this act is not only wrong in and of itself, but the data is likely going to be used to harm americans' interests. So, deserving of punishment.
by mingus88 | 2025-04-23 21:21:43+00:00
If you take a step back and realize that the intent is to utterly destroy the social safety net provided by social security, Medicare, etc that we have all been paying into our entire adult lives, tell me why every citizen affected should not pursue civil and criminal charges of theft and fraud with malicious intent?

And then the means to do so have involved ignoring the courts and bypassing constitutional checks and balances? Please tell me how this isn’t criminal if not treasonous?
by snyy | 2025-04-23 21:22:52+00:00
When you sign up for Chonkie, you’ll receive a bundle of free credits to get started. These credits are used as you process documents, based on the pricing listed at chonkie.ai/pricing.

Once your credits run out, no worries—Chonkie keeps working! You’ll continue to be billed based on usage, so there’s no interruption in service.

Credits are refreshed at the start of every billing cycle.
by djoldman | 2025-04-23 21:23:16+00:00
The part where many may object:

> First, the majority might say that Shopify should not engage in privacy-invasive activities. I didn’t invest the energy to figure out the irreducible privacy elements of the plaintiffs’ claims, but if using cookies to track users is an essential part of the claim, then more privacy-protective option are not feasibly available to Shopify.
by 77pt77 | 2025-04-23 21:23:54+00:00
> accounts created for DOGE at the NLRB downloaded three code repositories from GitHub

Why is anything of significance on github in the first place?

Edit: It's not. They just download python libraries to do "IP rotation" to circumvent rate limits.

On the actual complaint: (https://whistlebloweraid.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/2025...)

It seems that the data was stored in Azure which doesn't make it any better.
by abe_m | 2025-04-23 21:23:57+00:00
I think this is along the lines of the AI horseless carriage[1] topic that is also on the front page right now. You seem to be describing the current method as operated through an AI intermediary. I think the power in AI for CAD will be at a higher level than lines, faces and holes. It will be more along the lines of "make a bracket between these two parts". "Make this part bolt to that other part". "Attach this pump to this gear train" (where the AI determines the pump uses a SAE 4 bolt flange of a particular size and a splined connection, then adds the required features to the housing and shafts). I think it will operate on higher structures than current CAD typically works with, and I don't think it will be history tree and sketch based like Solidworks or Inventor. I suspect it will be more of a direct modelling approach. I also think integrating FEA to allow the AI to check its work will be part of it. When you tell it to make a bracket between two parts, it can check the weight of the two parts, and some environmental specification from a project definition, then auto-configure FEA to check the correct number of bolts, material thickness, etc. If it made the bracket from folded sheet steel, you could then tell it you want a cast aluminum bracket, and it could redo the work.

[1]https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43773813
by antasvara | 2025-04-23 21:23:57+00:00
I mean, the view I have is that at the time of the LBO nobody knows for sure what will happen.

The PE firm knows what they plan to do. The lenders know in a general sense what the PE firm plans to do, along with the track record of that firm's other LBO's and loans. Even if the outcome of bankruptcy is fairly certain, it's hard to predict how long it will take until that happens.

The point I'm making is that if you only look at the failures, LBO's look like a bust out. But I don't think the entire concept of an LBO is a bust out, which is why I don't think the lenders are dumb for underwriting these loans.
by testing1235 | 2025-04-23 21:24:00+00:00
Hi Neil, I'm not that person you replied to but in my projects I require Cyrillic glyphs for Russian and Ukrainian texts. Also when checking out your website just now, I wasn't able to add a Berkeley Mono App License module in your ordering system. I assume I need a App License to embed the font in my app? But I also can't seem to find any information about the app license itself on your site as well.
by kiitos | 2025-04-23 21:24:12+00:00
Wow you really hate Terraform!

It seems to me that your frustration with Terraform being "completely idiotic" is ultimately frustration with the underlying design model.

> If you write configuration to create a Security Group named "foobar",

That configuration is a declaration: a security group named "foobar" should exist, with the declared properties.

> and do a `terraform plan`, it will say it's about to create "foobar".

That plan would be based on the most recent snapshot of the target "outside world" resources, which, if you haven't synced them recently (or at all) would probably be empty, resulting in `terraform plan` proposing to create foobar afresh.

> When you go to apply, it will error out, saying "foobar already exists"

Sure, which should hopefully make sense. You've declared a resource locally, and asked Terraform to "make it so" basically. But that resource is in conflict with an identical remote resource. You can `terraform refresh` or sync or whatever, to pull down the current relevant remote resource state locally, and then operate from there. Or you can manually blow away the remote foobar and retry. Or etc.

But this kind of situation is not common. Terraform assumes and expects that the declarations (and state) it has access to locally is an authoritative source of truth for what the target remote system(s) should be. The config files define what should be running in AWS, not the other way around.

It's fine if this isn't a fit for your use cases, but I don't think that means the entire tool is stupid or whatever. It just means it's not for you.
by alabastervlog | 2025-04-23 21:25:00+00:00
In most US cities, the walkable parts that aren't heavily crime-ridden and distressed still have pretty bad schools (because they're just pockets here and there among the really poor parts) so you'll be adding the cost of private school (and hassle/cost of transportation to it, if it's a day school) to the already-high costs of housing.

There are a very-few cities with walkable areas of the actual city (not a walkable 'burb) that buck this trend, but it's the overwhelming norm. If you have money, have kids, and live in the city, the kids go to private school.

(Yes, I know, parts of NYC are a huge exception to this, I'm just saying, your list of potential target cities with this scheme is short unless you're planning to also pay for private school, in which case a whole bunch of cities open up)
by Glyptodon | 2025-04-23 21:25:03+00:00
Maybe the line of reasoning offered and argued against is dubious. But IMO there are literally dozens of other arguments that will come to the same conclusion if you want to avoid hand waving about the particular bits the author raises.

By and large states having different laws is a pain, but arguing that you can do business in every state while only following the laws of one state is a very messy rejection of state's rights, and leads to using the commerce clause to basically negate most state level regulations and jurisdiction.
by janalsncm | 2025-04-23 21:25:23+00:00
Apparently a single lightning strike contains the equivalent of about 40 gallons of gasoline. It’s very powerful but not that significant on the scale of a whole city.

In fact a quick back of the napkin math suggests it would only power a city of a million people for half a second.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvesting_lightning_energy
by candiddevmike | 2025-04-23 21:25:45+00:00
The people who need to see/understand this live in a different reality where uncomfortable things like this are ETL'd into righteous anger towards people they don't like.

This is the deep state they've been worried about, this is the boot that will tread on them.

EDIT: parent comment was highest ranked comment for the article and is now at the bottom?
by ToucanLoucan | 2025-04-23 21:26:41+00:00
> So it's unfair to say they don't exist. Rather, it seems they're structured in an unhelpful way for those who are working double jobs, etc.

I'll be sure to alert the next person I encounter working UberEats for slave wages that the resources exist that they cannot use. I'm sure this difference will impact their lives greatly.

Edit: My point isn't that UberEats drivers make slave wages (though they do): My point is that from the POV of said people and others who need the aforementioned resources, whether they don't exist or exist and are unusable is fucking irrelevant.
by freedomben | 2025-04-23 21:27:34+00:00
Indeed, sounds like we're largely in agreement then.

> Because you said that a situation in which YouTube exercised the right to moderate their own platform was a "total abandonment of free speech principles"

True I did say that, and I'll definitely walk that one back a little bit. I didn't mean their moderation as a whole was the abandonment, I mainly meant their philosophical approach to it. (i.e. deciding that anything that goes contrary to the CDC/WHO narrative may not be discussed)