MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by lvass | 2025-04-06 17:16:24+00:00
I definitely agree with ads being bad in principle. But banning shills is an even worse idea than banning ads, because you absolutely, under no circumstance, can correctly identify those. Any "replacement for the small, actual valuable thing that advertising provides, which is providing information", is bound to become infested in ways you cannot control. Escalate this idea further to solve the issues you created and you would end up banning speech or trade.
by kitwooki2o | 2025-04-06 17:16:47+00:00
For the past six months, our team has been working on https://revopush.org/ – The Ultimate Alternative to CodePush.

On March 31, 2025, Microsoft is officially shutting down the CodePush project, leaving thousands of teams without an alternative for OTA updates.

We took the open-source version of the SDK as our foundation and created a managed cloud solution. This allows both small teams and large enterprises to retain the functionality of CodePush with minimal migration effort.

Our roadmap includes further development of the project, launching a CodePush 2.0 version. In it, we'll deliver features that the community has long requested, remove legacy accumulated over the years, and adapt the SDK to modern development standards.
by twoodfin | 2025-04-06 17:17:03+00:00
Strengthened.

In the US this has happened:

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEPAINUSA646N

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/DSPIC96

Meanwhile across the entire world this has happened:

https://ourworldindata.org/history-of-poverty-data-appendix

You can argue the growth of globalization & lowering of trade barriers were unrelated to this up-and-to-the-right, but it’s hard to argue they’re making things worse unless you really scope down to particular losers in a world of mostly winners.
by eszed | 2025-04-06 17:17:06+00:00
I agree with everything you say about elite over-production, chasing social status, and cargo-culting material goods. It is indeed, bullshit, that makes many exploitable - which, of course, is the whole point, from the "system's" point of view. On an individual level, for those of us in sufficiently privileged positions, breaking that dynamic is as you say.

However, I don't think you can ignore politics! "Changing what's in your heart", does diddly if you're, say, working in the Triangle Shirtwaist factory. It took a +century of dedicated labor activism and political effort to get to a point where any workers at all could dream of breaking free, and in the US we've arguably backslid in recent decades. Continued political action and worker solidarity are desperately needed.
by chongli | 2025-04-06 17:17:29+00:00
Is it taken without consent?

There's no clearer lack of consent than attempts by advertisers to circumvent, block, or ban ad-blockers.

These advertisers could choose to put up paywalls but that would harm their search rankings, so they don't. Instead, they play games with cloaking [1] and other SEO techniques in order to bypass the user's wishes and show them ads (or even ads + cloaked paywalls).

At least YouTube offers a paid premium service which remains ad-free.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloaking
by Retric | 2025-04-06 17:17:32+00:00
The same basic questions arise for things like a tire blowout.

At minimum cars need to handle being on a curve when LiDAR or vision etc cuts off. Stopping on a freeway or railroad is a real risk even if people can get out, but now you’re doing risk mitigation calculations not just trying to handle normal driving. “What if someone is asleep in a level 5 car?” is a question worth considering, but we’re a long way self driving without any from of human backup.

The hospital thing is for the very real possibility of being outside of cellphone range, and represents the apex of gracefully shutting down the ride vs refusing to travel while in a less safe condition.
by nextaccountic | 2025-04-06 17:17:45+00:00
There is a way to sandbox native code without forking to a new process, and it looks like this

https://hacks.mozilla.org/2020/02/securing-firefox-with-weba...

Firefox employs processes for sandboxing but for small components they are not worth the overhead. For those they employed this curious idea: first compile the potentially unsafe code to wasm (any other VM would work), then compile the wasm code to C (using the wasm2c tool). Then use this new C source normally in your program.

All UB in the original code becomes logical bugs in the wasm, that can output incorrect values but not corrupt memory or do things that UB can do. Firefox does this to encapsulate C code, but it can be done with Rust too
by chris-tsang | 2025-04-06 17:18:38+00:00
Author of VTracer here. Finally being able to comment on hackernews before the thread got locked.

Would be interested in learning about your workflow. Is it a logo generation app?

I feel like this is an example of "Machine learning is eating software". Raster to vector conversion is a perfect problem, because we can generate dataset of infinite sizes and can easily validate them with vectorize-rasterize roundtrips.

I did have an idea of performing tracing iteratively. Basically by adjusting the output SVG bit-by-bit until it matches the original image within a certain margin of error. And optimizing the output size of the SVG by simplifying curves if it does not degrade the quality. But VTracer in its current state is oneshot and probably uses 1/100 of the computational resources.

VTracer seems to perform badly on all the examples. I suspect it can be drastically improved simply by upscaling the image (via traditional interpolation, or machine learning based) and picking different parameters. But I am glad that it was cited!
by foolswisdom | 2025-04-06 17:18:41+00:00
> The article never says how much they detected. I can only assume it’s because it’s a nothing amount. If it was significant they would have been saying how much. It’s hard to take the article seriously as a result.

Did we read the same article? There's a table with the amounts of different metals, with the amounts found in each of the different samples.
by coldtea | 2025-04-06 17:19:13+00:00
>I can't because a world with magic and world peace is more realistic and believable. It's impossible. How do you even define advertising?

No ads in TV programming. No product placement in movies. No billboards. No subway or bus station advertising posters. No paid recommending of specific products. No promotional material for products - nothing with fictional elements. No web ads. No sponsored links. No social media ads. No paid reviews.

(you could still do some of those covertly, with "under the table" money, but then if you caught you get fined or go to jail)

No tracking consuming preferences of any kind, not even if you have an online store. Just a database of past purchases on your own store - and using them for profiling via ML should be illegal too.

If people want to find out about a product, they can see it on your company's website (seeking it directly), or get a leaflet from you. In either case no dramatized / finctional / aspirational images or video should be shown.

>And in all cases, you are self-imposing a restriction that will give other nations an economic advantage and jeopardizing long-term sovereignty.

You're removing cancer.
by spencerflem | 2025-04-06 17:19:29+00:00
A list of stores by closeness is not advertising, a site dedicated to impartially reviewing guitars is not advertising, telling your friends about a guitar you like is not advertising.

I hate all the comments being so coy about definitions. Ublock seems to block ads pretty well. Maybe start there and not these crazy hypotheticals where anyone saying anything about a product is banned
by AbstractH24 | 2025-04-06 17:19:33+00:00
Because in a fully remote environment it is easy to default to having transactional relationships and only when a job responsibility requires them. Just like I do with a customer service rep.

You don’t see your coworkers in the hall, overhear them talking to their kid, or talk while working. Certainly don’t by default interact with folks who work in parallel.

Not saying that in office means these things will certainly occur. But because by default these interactions don’t occur, the likelihood of them happening organically is quite low.
by mindslight | 2025-04-06 17:20:44+00:00
Hindsight weakens the case for free trade in 2003, along with the realization that the government would do very little [0] to mitigate the specific harms using the centralized gains (from massive monetary creation without much corresponding price inflation).

But in 2025, tariffs are closing the barn door after the horse ran out, went to horse college, settled down, had some foals, and saw them grow up and move into their own doorless barns. But that's populism for you, always responding to the previous crisis with an approach that will enrich its sponsors and then cause the next crisis.

[0] The Republican party's fake "fiscal responsibility" where most of that money was just handed to banks instead, driving up the asset bubbles. I'm saying this as a general libertarian from a conservative Austrian economics view, not as a Democratic partisan booster. But blame where blame is due.
by llincerd | 2025-04-06 17:21:10+00:00
Darwin is interesting because of the pace of radical changes to its core components. From dropping syscall backwards compatibility to mandatory code signing to dyld_shared_cache eliminating individual system library files to speed up dynamic executable loading. It's a very results-oriented design approach with no nostalgia and no sacred cows. I think only a big hardware vendor like Apple could pull it off.
by wavemode | 2025-04-06 17:22:36+00:00
In middle school my parents got me a graphing calculator for Algebra. Couldn't figure out a damn thing about how to write programs on it, and I didn't really have much computer or internet access at home, but I was curious.

In the school computer lab I did some searching and found a programming guide for that model of calculator on some university website. While printing out my assignment I also secretly printed out the guide and hid it under the other papers (not supposed to be wasting ink on a personal print job). Took it home and was glued to it for months.

Eventually I was able to program the game Snake. It ran slow as hell, but it ran.
by hwillis | 2025-04-06 17:23:03+00:00
> Imagine if you could only see in a very narrow portion of the visible light spectrum, like only green or something.

No, that's how lidar works. Lidars have a single frequency and a very narrow bandwidth. Automotive radars have a bandwidth of 1-5 GHz. They operate around 80 GHz, which is very well reflected by water (including people) and moderately reflected by things like plastic. 80 GHz is industrially used to measure levels of plastic feedstock.

Compare TSA scanner images, which are ~300 GHz: https://www.researchgate.net/figure/a-Front-and-back-millime...

You are correct that most automotive radars like Bosch units [1] are very low detail though. Most of them don't output images or anything- they run proprietary algorithms that identify the largest detection frequencies (usually a limited number of them) and calculate the direction and distance to them. Unlike cameras and lidars they do not return raw data, so naturally when building driver assistance companies instead relied on cameras and lidar. Progress was instead driven by the manufacturers and with smaller incentives the progress is slower.

[1]: https://www.bosch-mobility.com/en/solutions/sensors/front-ra...
by loudmax | 2025-04-06 17:23:19+00:00
Ironically, the one American car company that was interesting to Europeans was Tesla.

European governments may be reluctant to put a tariff on Tesla because of Elon Musk's political association with the Trump government. This is literally how fascism works, and appeasing the bully is distasteful, but that's realpolitik. It will be up to European consumers to reject Tesla because the brand is now toxic.
by rollcat | 2025-04-06 17:23:25+00:00
IMHO a kernel managing a file (any file) all on its own imposes too many assumptions about hardware and user space. This could unexpectedly bite you if you're in a rescue system trying to fsck, booting from external RO media, running diskless or from NFS, etc.

Meanwhile Linux allows you to swapon(2) just about anything. A file, a partition, a whole disk, /dev/zram, even a zvol. (The last one could lead to a nasty deadlock, don't do it.)

Perhaps the XNU/NeXT/Darwin/OSX developers wanted a similar level of flexibility? Have the right piece in place, even just as a stub?
by rr808 | 2025-04-06 17:23:39+00:00
I like the idea. I read a bunch of classics from Gutenberg. In reality so many old books are very long and boring I ended up getting more modern books from the library instead.

Maybe TikTok ruined me but maybe these things really do literally have a shelf life. Hopefully reformatting will help. Perhaps a better way to review and find the gems would be most helpful..
by crazygringo | 2025-04-06 17:24:15+00:00
You were responding to a comment criticizing Musk for removing "radar/lidar".

So I'm assuming that the "superhuman vision" you described meant specifically if people had LIDAR, since that was the subject at hand.

LIDAR is superior to cameras because it much more accurately detects objects. It's an advantage all the time, and an especially huge advantage at night.

So LIDAR isn't orthogonal to anything. It's the entire point. If people had LIDAR, the accident rate would be significantly reduced.

You're arguing that LIDAR won't help cars, because by analogy it wouldn't help people if it was a native biological sense. But that's wrong.
by changhis | 2025-04-06 17:24:49+00:00
I was 9 when I first moved to the US. I couldn't speak English so the teacher stuck me in front of the classroom computer. It was one of those monochrome all-in-one console things that must have been from the 80's and the only thing on there was Q-basic. To pass the time I followed the tutorials to create my own MUD. And that's how I learned BASIC before English.
by mixmastamyk | 2025-04-06 17:26:03+00:00
The AI trade bubble has already been popped, early by unrelated macro events.

Big companies are still investing in centers, and nvidia is still supply constrained to my knowledge however. New models are popping up. So there’s still real business/progress happening.

Remains to be seen how useful the products will ultimately be. Bottom line, growth should be smaller and more realistic from here on. Though I’m sure there’ll be spikes when the speculator contingent comes back to the market.

The later that happens, the more they’ll be constrained by reality.
by Voice_of_Void | 2025-04-06 17:26:51+00:00
After analyzing interaction patterns between users and AI systems, we've identified key differences between high and low-efficiency approaches.

This isn't a collection of prompt engineering tricks, but a fundamental rethinking of the human-AI relationship.

The data shows command-style interaction achieves only 60% task success, while collaborative approaches reach 85%. We explore the cognitive models behind this disparity and provide concrete techniques to improve your results.

The article includes data visualizations comparing different interaction methods, common error patterns, and effectiveness growth curves as users gain experience.
by agubelu | 2025-04-06 17:27:12+00:00
Many people share the worldview that those who are higher up in the hierarchy of power are the most capable or deserving of such positions.

So when those leaders start acting in a way that is irrational or clearly damaging, there's a pretty strong cognitive dissonance. There are two ways to deal with it:

- Assume that, since they're the higher-ups, they must know what they're doing. Therefore there must be some sort of plan that you're not able or supposed to understand.

- Reassess the notion that the higher-ups are always the most capable or deserving people, and assume there's a chance for inept people to access positions of power.

The first one is the path of least resistance, since it doesn't require challenging a fundamental pillar of your worldview.
by bccdee | 2025-04-06 17:27:56+00:00
> natural market by default, meaning you must use brutal authoritarianism to disrupt it entirely

Ok? If that's how we define "brutal authoritarianism," I guess I'm a brutal authoritarian. There's a natural market for mob hitmen (scarce + in-demand)—are you opposed to a "brutal authoritarian" crackdown on those too?

> Disrupting natural markets with authoritarianism usually ends up worse than any downsides of the decentralized market regulation of that scarcity.

Citation very much needed. Suppliers of lead paint, asbestos, ozone-destroying aerosols, contaminated foodstuffs, etc. did not regulate themselves in a decentralized manner. In fact, take virtually any toxic contaminant or hazardous product and you'll usually find that the market colluded to cover up evidence of harm, rather than "self-regulating."

> generally trends toward making the highest value messages for both the audience and advertiser

Absolutely not. Consumers do not exert demand for certain types of ads in preference to others. There's no mechanism for ads to converge toward high audience value. It's advertiser value that is optimized for, often to the detriment of consumers (e.g. advertisements for profitable scams, which have negative value).

Even if you want to argue that advertisements inform consumers to some extent, that's probably outweighed by the extent that they misinform consumers. Consider infomercial products: Regular kitchen knives don't need an advertisement because demand is inelastic. If you're cooking, you need a knife; nobody has to promote the idea of knives. But the "slap-chop" is a product with elastic demand, and thus the marginal value of advertising is much greater for them. Hence, they can afford to buy up huge amounts of ad space to drum up demand for an essentially worthless product. The advertising ecosystem has perverse incentive to promote scams.

> But to ban it outright would require an extreme policing of all speech at all levels of society.

There are a lot of noxious and socially destructive things which are not practical to ban.
by jpc0 | 2025-04-06 17:28:39+00:00
Unrelated to the above discussion but, not justfies it, it's still wrong.

But a poor hungry person is a lot more likely to commit a crime of opportunity that feeds them and their family than a well of, well fed person.

Maybe you are actually agreeing with me.

My view, as a neutral observer to the Hamas / IDF debate is they are both wrong and you would ( inclusive you not you specifically ) would probably do the same... Cough Afghanistan etc...
by westurner | 2025-04-06 17:28:40+00:00
From https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30025477 :

> [ audit2allow, https://stopdisablingselinux.com/ ]

Applications don't need to be compiled with selinux libraries unless they want to bypass CLI tools like chcon and restorecon (which set extended filesystem attributes according to the system policy; typically at package install time if the package provenance is sufficient) by linking with libselinux.
by Veserv | 2025-04-06 17:29:23+00:00
That number is incidents successfully detected, not ground truth. Last I looked, the majority of recorded fatalities went undetected by Tesla telematics. That demonstrates their accident detection/reporting is empirically incapable of producing a robust ground truth estimate. The number presented is a lower bound with no identifiable upper bound.

A upper bound could be easily produced by Tesla. All vehicle fatalities identified by police are recorded in the national Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) [1]. Tesla could investigate every recorded Tesla fatality by VIN and cross-reference with their telemetry to determine if their systems were available at all or active on or near the time of the fatal crash. This would cost them between a few thousand dollars to a few million dollars annually, depending on desired precision, which compared to the billions it makes annually is minuscule sum to affirmatively establish safety.

They intentionally choose to not do so. Instead deliberately deceiving consumers and the public by conflating the lower bound with a upper bound in all official safety messaging.

Even ignoring their gross incompetence or maliciousness in not doing simple safety analysis when numerous lives are on the line. The mere fact they conflate a lower bound with a upper bound in their messaging is scientific malfeasance of the highest order. Their reporting has zero credibility when they make such clear and intentional misreporting purely for their own benefit to the detriment of the public and even their own customers.

[1] https://www.nhtsa.gov/research-data/fatality-analysis-report...
by foobarchu | 2025-04-06 17:29:33+00:00
> Well, Fox News is is probably one of the most influential sources of propaganda in our era, and they're just publishing news with a strong political slant.

That's not advertising by any standard, unless they're being paid by someone to do it (whether they currently are or not is irrelevant). Just because someone can benefit doesn't make it advertising/propaganda, it's about the whether the funding comes from someone who benefits from the particular content.

As another example, Good Mythical Morning and other YouTube shows frequently do product comparisons / tests. That clearly isn't advertising, unless the companies who make those product are sponsoring them.
by vulnfree | 2025-04-06 17:29:48+00:00
Hi All,

I'm Nate, the cofounder and CEO of VulnFree. We sell low/no CVE container images, helping automate the container security process.

~96% of our images have no vulns per the open source Trivy security scanner, and we are the cheapest player in the market by a longshot (75+% cheaper than prevailing rates).

Feel free to contact me directly if you need anything:

(my first name)@vulnfree.com
by vindarel | 2025-04-06 17:29:57+00:00
But where is it now? If not mainstream, where? Is it not used at all, or only by hobbyists, or also by successful companies, today? If it isn't mainstream, is it important, if not, what's the cursor?

elements to not judge in the void https://github.com/azzamsa/awesome-lisp-companies/ (some are hiring) (that's just the companies we know, nothing official)

https://github.com/CodyReichert/awesome-cl/
by esrauch | 2025-04-06 17:30:47+00:00
When you use that syntax it looks like you are calling out an explicit quote; you may think that it's a reasonable paraphrase but I think most readers will see what you did as a strawman instead of a paraphrase.

Better to write inline "I feel like what you said amounts to [...]" to reduce the perception they you're making up quotes they someone didn't say or even clearly imply.