MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by arunabha | 2025-05-29 02:59:33+00:00
Yes, it does. Because it draws a clear line in the sand. The administration can choose to disobey the order, but that opens up individuals in the govt to potential prosecution later. That's why governments try fairly hard to go the legal route or at least maintain a fig leaf of explanations, however implausible.

The supreme court might have declared the president to be immune for official acts, but that doesn't extend to govt officials blatantly choosing contempt of court. They have practical immunity in the current administration. A future administration might not look so kindly on such actions.
by alzhi | 2025-05-29 02:59:39+00:00
pgrwl is a PostgreSQL write-ahead log (WAL) receiver written in Go.

It’s a drop-in, container-friendly alternative to pg_receivewal, supporting streaming replication, encryption, compression, and remote storage (S3, SFTP).

Designed for disaster recovery and PITR (Point-in-Time Recovery), pgrwl ensures zero data loss (RPO=0) and seamless integration with Kubernetes environments.

GitHub: https://github.com/hashmap-kz/pgrwl Design Notes: https://github.com/hashmap-kz/pgrwl?tab=readme-ov-file#desig... Feedback, use cases, and contributions are welcome!
by lvturner | 2025-05-29 02:59:53+00:00
I know of enterprises in APAC now spending millions of dollars on Huawei GPUs, while they might not be as efficient, they are seen as geopolitically more stable (especially given the region).

DeepSeek helped "prove" to a lot of execs that "Good" is "Good enough" and that there are viable alternatives with less perceived risk of supply chain disruption - even if facts differ may from this narrative.
by hwayne | 2025-05-29 03:01:10+00:00
`S = {str -> bool}` is actually uncountable. `S` is isomorphic to the power set (set of all subsets) of `str`, and `2^str` is at least as big as the set of real numbers, as any real number (like π) can be mapped to the set of string prefixes (like `{"3", "3.1", "3.14", ...}`). Since the reals are uncountable, so is `2^str` and `S`.
by bschwindHN | 2025-05-29 03:02:53+00:00
I love notebooks + erasable Frixion pens as an alternative to whiteboards. You can still get multiple colors the ability to erase, but you have a finer pen point for more accuracy and more permanence than a whiteboard (though I know you have to keep these notes away from heat as that's how they erase).

It's especially useful for graphics/visual programming tasks.
by magicalhippo | 2025-05-29 03:03:39+00:00
> This paper is saying that the discrepancy has been solved by using a more fancy set of computations

That's underselling an important point I think. Here's my understanding of it:

There have been two methods to provide the theoretical value, one based on calculating loop corrections, the so-called data-driven approach, and one based on lattice QCD.

From what I can gather, the point in the paper is rather that they stopped using the data-driven prediction, and relied solely on the lattice QCD prediction. This is unlike the previous paper where they combined the two predictions into one.

The former method requires a bunch of measured data as inputs, like how frequently many different interactions happens in nature (their cross-section). It requires more theoretical work, figuring out the loop correction formulas, and all those measurements, but once you have that you can relatively quickly compute the result.

What happened was that one very important cross-section was measured significantly better, but it disagreed with all former measurements. This despite very thorough cross-checking of the experiment. So when those new results were plugged in, the data-driven method gave a much worse prediction.

Meanwhile, the latter method is more brute-force, and relies on simulating QCD on a lattice[1]. A much more complex version of those water simulations used in movies and such. Due to how the physics is, it's very expensive to simulate, and thus the simulations haven't been quite good enough. Recent improvements to the method has changed that, making its predictions in line with the measured value.

The authors states fixing the data-driven method is of high importance, so hopefully this will be fully resolved in the future.

At least that's my armchair understanding.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lattice_QCD
by cadamsdotcom | 2025-05-29 03:03:41+00:00
It continues two trends dating back well before ChatGPT.

1. Companies' declining investment in "developing people to senior". It's been declining for decades.

2. Self-education becoming key to "finishing" your education. College can't reasonably provide a complete education with the complexity and pace of software. New frameworks, CI, git, just all sorts of things aren't in curricula. University starts with Von Neumann, bubble sort, & big-O and has to proceed forward from there. Luckily today's kids have infinitely-patient LLMs! And insane amounts of content from youtubers! And infinite distribution! It's easier than ever to put your work out there and have it be seen. Kids can apply to jobs adding links to their portfolios and their open-source and show their chops that way, meaning companies need to lean less on interviews.

> "AI isn't stealing job categories outright — it's absorbing the lowest-skill tasks," Doshay said. "That shifts the burden to universities, boot camps, and candidates to level up faster."

Taking on interns and junior devs used to be part of the deal for tech companies that wanted the best talent. Now they can just look at kids' public portfolios and pluck the best ones.

It's a brave new world built on public personas where everyone is their own CEO and it's not for everyone. That's where the race comes in.

Once companies realize only so many AIs can be overseen by one person, they'll hire anyone and everyone who can babysit AIs to produce what the company needs - the more AI you can babysit the more valuable you are. Companies will become desperate for talent to put the compute to work. Jevons Paradox at full tilt.

Young guns WILL succeed in this environment. They'll learn on their own time and dime. It was never easier thanks to LLMs with infinite patience and youtubers providing deep explanations.

But it's not entry level software engineering. It's seat-of-your-pants learning and moving fast, running and gunning to get a thing built. Quality guardrails like PRs, code review, tests and such are more important than ever - installing and instilling is where you as senior dev can shine.
by trod1234 | 2025-05-29 03:04:13+00:00
It was bound to happen.

The people seeking total control and power end up actively selecting against the evolutionary pressures that reward intelligence; the very thing that would normally allow them survive in chaotic times. Their choices doom themselves, and their descendants, as well as any who could not see through or stop their lies. Hubris.

Knowledge which should have been preserved, is lost, and all that's left is a vast void after a short period of time where everything chaotically slips through their fingers and all then find peace in nothingness.

When the consequences are so dire and visible, you treat those decisions with care, but that was not done because people were blinded.

The things people are saying now about these things I was saying right after the weights for open models were released to the public late 2022. Inaction is an action itself.

You've basically got a 10 year window from the point where you begin removing entry level positions, 2 years you lose the most competent people; they can't find work and seek out other areas, 5 years you start to permanently lose generational knowledge; the practical parts, and by 10 years, no amount of money will let you find those people, they won't exist anymore because there was no economic benefit (infinite cost). We are 3 months away from 2 years; on this timetable.

Supply chains fail, food systems fail, people then starve, as order devolves into chaos.
by namuol | 2025-05-29 03:04:18+00:00
Beware the greenfield effect.

I don’t want to comment on the technology choices specifically here, but in general the whole “we rewrote our app in X and now it’s better” is essentially a fact of life no matter the tech choices, at least for the first big rewrite.

First, you’re going to make better technical choices overall. You know much better where the problems lie.

Second, you’re rarely going to want to port over every bit of technical debt, bugs, or clunky UX decisions (with some exceptions [1]), so those things get fixed out of the gate.

Finally, it’s simply invigorating to start from a (relatively) clean slate, so that added energy is going to feel good and leave you in a sort of freshly-mowed greenfield afterglow. This in turn will motivate you and improve your work.

The greenfield effect happens even on smaller scales, especially when trying out a new language or framework, since you’re usually starting some new project with it.

[1] A good example of the sort of rewrite that _does_ offer something like an apples-to-apples comparison is Microsoft’s rewrite of the TypeScript compiler (and type checker, and LSP implementation) from TypeScript to Go, since they are aiming for 1-to-1 compatibility, including bugs and quirks: https://github.com/microsoft/typescript-go
by dfc | 2025-05-29 03:04:20+00:00
Different folks different strokes. But I think saying "who cares what the decor inside the house looks like" is a little naive. Surely you can imagine that there is some population of people that care what the decor inside their house looks like AND do not want to hide the display on the thermostat? I think that group of people is probably a significant number of people... large enough that you are not raining on OP's parade.
by Tor3 | 2025-05-29 03:05:01+00:00
It's more because entering addresses on web forms can be a major problem in Japan, there's no system to it. You have to use the correct font (half-width, full-width), and sometimes you have to write it twice, and sometimes with different characters, and much more. And the other thing this system does is that the same code will work when you move somewhere else, as long as you re-register your address. Once.

The missing street address used to be a big problem. The postal delivery people had (and still have, of course) a way to look up your address - which is really just the property number, in the area where I live) and find it on a map. Normal people couldn't. But now we can enter the property number into e.g. google maps, and it'll find the actual location. Which, of course, means that you need to be online with your digital device. Which I wouldn't be until recently (I've got this pocket wifi now), unless I was in a wifi area.

In my home country I can easily find any location just by someone telling me the street name and number. No map needed, no online presence.. my home address has a property id, known by the city, and a street address, for everybody else. Japan is like that, just that the street address is missing..
by tloula | 2025-05-29 03:07:21+00:00
I had this question myself when I first learned about MCP and have seen many other people question this as well. As I've learned more about MCP, I've compiled a list of reasons for MCP in place of REST APIs + OpenAPI Specs and recently wrote an article about it [1]. Here's a few of the more overlooked reasons IMO:

- Small Language Models: While most current MCP servers are wrappers on APIs, MCP was designed to be more than that. Think of a SLM running on a local NPU using MCP to interface with the device itself - streaming real-time data between the hardware and the SLM.

- Cost: OpenAPI specs are huge, and including them in the context window for every request would add up.

[1] https://trevorloula.com/blog/what-is-mcp/#why-use-mcp-rather...
by notorious_pgb | 2025-05-29 03:07:23+00:00
I see what you're getting at -- though then it raises the question: what would it mean for those processes to have multiple threads within them?

The way I've been looking at it, if I want to take this further, processes would maybe be _NES ROMs_, and each process can have multiple threads. Swapping between processes would inherently be more expensive than between threads within a process, which I think would be a really instructive aspect. Also, the whole idea of "sharing memory" between entirely different games is obviously ridiculous, which could be yet another teaching tool.

Then if we want to expand it even further, maybe multicore support would look like multiple emulator instances, connected via sockets to support cross-core IPC. You'd probably want to institute an "all the threads of a process have to be on the same core" rule (so they can locally share primitives in the same Lua script), which would be a great way to demonstrate the principle of building systems which adapt to their realistic constraints, as opposed to building systems which exactly model a textbook.

I've gotten ahead of myself, though.
by Leo-thorne | 2025-05-29 03:08:37+00:00
This feels like bringing up an old issue again. These days, a lot of trade policy just comes down to whatever the president decides, with very little public debate. When a 70-year-old law gets used as the main justification, it makes you wonder if emergency powers have simply become too convenient for anyone to walk away from. Whether this ruling will actually change anything probably depends on whether people care enough to follow up later.
by nl | 2025-05-29 03:10:55+00:00
One can't claim this without addressing Obama's (correct) decision to follow the spirit of the law and not push through[1] Merrick Garland when Republicans refused to conduct committee hearings[2].

[1] https://newrepublic.com/article/138787/obama-can-put-merrick...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merrick_Garland_Supreme_Court_...
by theamk | 2025-05-29 03:11:58+00:00
We already have a standardized system - robots.txt - and AI bots are already ignoring it. Why would more standardized headers matter? Bots will ignore them just as they do today, pretend to be regular users, and get content without paying.

(A secondary thing is that AI bots have basically zero benefit for most websites, so unless you are some low-cost crappy content farm, it'll be in your interest to raise the prices to the max so the bots are simply locked out. Which will bring us back to point 1, bots ignoring the headers)
by remram | 2025-05-29 03:12:12+00:00
Looks to be similar to Hurl https://hurl.dev/ https://github.com/Orange-OpenSource/hurl Apache-2.0

Not sure, it's hard to parse your website. Too many empty taglines like "docs that do more" and "git-native", and the 5px font in your screenshots does not help. This screams "no programmers only designers here". Honestly it's a red flag for a programming tool.
by jmogly | 2025-05-29 03:13:58+00:00
YES! I am in my mid twenties and I have only seen unimaginable technological progress from the early 2000’s to now. From the small white Panasonic television in my childhood kitchen and having to reboot my family desktop computer when zoo tycoon froze it, to playing massive multiplayer games like runescape and Roblox with real people, that was incredible!, to seeing an iPhone for the first time, the higs boson being confirmed, gravitational waves, electric cars becoming a real thing, how you can go nearly anywhere in the world and touch your phone to pay without cash, or use google maps to figure out when and where to go anywhere no matter where you are, to ChatGPT and LLM’s, which can alchemize all of our human knowledge to approximately/exact answers to questions that have never been asked before.

The future has been a lot more interesting than people are giving it credit for, atleast my brief slice of it so far.
by jmb99 | 2025-05-29 03:14:07+00:00
It requires some effort. You have to actually sign up and attend trades school (which requires a non-zero amount of money up front and you’ll go 6-12 weeks without pay - which also can be a problem for some people), then spend some effort finding someone to take you on as an apprentice, and you have to actually think and learn things. Nothing particularly difficult but still, you need some non-zero degree of critical thinking skills.

If you don’t have that level of motivation (which again, is really not that high), you won’t succeed. You can walk into an Amazon warehouse (or honestly, any similar warehouse job) and start working either that day or in very short order, and get paid in 2 weeks or less. It’s the least amount of effort possible to get a job, but it’s also the least rewarding (mentally, financially, etc).

There are also some people who genuinely cannot work in the trades. Almost any kind of physical disability and you’re at a severe disadvantage. Same with mental disabilities (to a lesser degree).

There’s real downsides too. Some trades are fairly dangerous (electrician comes to mind, especially if you’re working with oldheads who are happy to work on live unfused lines/etc) and almost all of them will result in you degrading your body faster than average (although this is also true for warehouse jobs). Buddy of mine caught a piece of shrapnel with his eye (while wearing listed wraparound safety glasses, mind you) while grinding some metal underneath a car, and has permanent vision damage in one eye at age 24. You also have to be pretty tolerant of more… abusive working environments. Aside from general tomfoolery (“boys will be boys” type mindset), there’s a substantially higher chance than average that your colleagues will be racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic, or all of the above, which isn’t great if you fall into one of those categories. It’s a lot better now than it was even 10-15 years ago, but it’s still very much a problem. (I’ve never had an office worker casually drop a hard-r while at work, but I’ve encountered enough tradespeople doing so that I’ve lost count of how many. And not even in an even remotely acceptable way, just whites dudes straight up using it to refer to someone as a slave or similar uses. In the past ~3 years.)

And honestly, probably a lot of people working at warehouses are moving to trades. Warehousing in general is high-turnover (40-50%, if not higher), so it would not shock me if a non-negligible portion of workers are switching to a non-warehouse career. I don’t know how to find stats on that though.

In short, lots of reasons.
by skissane | 2025-05-29 03:14:28+00:00
> Discriminates in fact against the commerce of the United States, directly or indirectly, by law or administrative regulation or practice… in such manner as to place the commerce of the United States at a disadvantage compared with the commerce of any foreign country.

I think the administration would find it easier to prove this than you think. They just have to find some regulation which they claim disadvantages the US compared to other countries. Given most countries have thousands of pages of regulations, it likely isn’t hard to find something in there that they can argue puts the US at a disadvantage-especially since what really matters is not whether it actually does, rather whether they can convince a court that it does

Real example: the US claims Australia bans US beef, Australia insists it is allowed. I believe the real problem is this-Australian regulations say US beef is allowed if the cattle are born in the US, raised in the US, slaughtered in the US… and the problem is the US cattle industry has such poor record-keeping, they intermingle US-born cattle with live cattle imports from Canada and Mexico and can’t produce the necessary paperwork to prove a shipment of beef is purely US-grown and hasn’t been mixed with beef from non-US origin cattle

Now, there is no reason in principle why the US cattle industry couldn’t improve their record-keeping to the point that it meets Australian regulations. But that would cost money and be politically unpopular-so instead US politicians just spread the rather misleading claim that “Australia bans US beef”. What really matters legally, is not the reasonableness of the claim, it is whether they can get a US judge to accept it-and quite possibly they could

And there’s probably several other cases where US companies can’t export their products to Australia because they aren’t willing to comply with Australian regulations. And likely many similar stories for other countries too. And if DOJ lawyers try to argue these cases fit under the legislation you are citing, IANAL but I think they’d have decent odds of success

> it's specifically targeting cases where a foreign country discriminates against US trade over and beyond the dues it charges on other countries' trade.

But, in this Australia case, all they have to do is find another country which can export beef to Australia because it does comply with these regulations, and there is their argument that Australia discriminates against the US. Should it matter legally that these regulations are reasonable and not intentionally discriminatory and US inability to comply is due to US unwillingness to pay for the reforms necessary to do so? I think it should, but entirely plausible that a judge decides it shouldn’t

EDIT: to be clear, I think these tariffs are pretty stupid-but whether something is stupid is a separate question from whether courts will uphold it. Many courts will uphold a lot of things which you or I know to be stupid
by neilv | 2025-05-29 03:15:05+00:00
This has merits, and I don't want to criticize that. But, as a matter of practice, I'd like to suggest, if you have the resources to task another experienced person to do a recorded interview, that might yield better results.

My most recent example...

A software engineer had given notice, while finishing solo marathon coding on a complicated big new thing that I think no one else had yet seen.

So I (as the new principal engineer, knowing we need a huge brain dump before the info disappears forever) scheduled some of the engineer's remaining time as top-priority, kept on them as their final-week marathon schedule kept shifting, and then recorded interviewing them with a screenshare.

Some of the things I asked could've been scripted questions, like starting with what is the purpose, where is the code, how to I get it all, how do I run it.

Then, scripted questions could ask about walking through the UI, or walking through the major parts.

But pretty quickly, I had to be asking questions that weren't just going through the usual motions, but reflected concerns specific to what was being said, as well as things that I thought were the top priority to understand.

I don't think an "AI" solution that is mostly LLM would have the insights that I did. It would be mostly scripted questions, maybe trying to get a sense of how much needs to be said about each thing in a template, and maybe mimicking things real software engineers have said in the past... but not handling well anything unusual.

Also, human rapport might get better information, or may even get the person to do it at all. Although I was new there, I was a fellow human, with whom the somewhat disgruntled employee had no grievance, and I was asking them to help me out, and investing in it myself. Not HR pointing them at an uncanny-valley robo-debriefer program that the company paid for, as a termination checklist item, and a ritual to perform their way through.

Also, if you have a rapport and some trust, and stop recording, and ask them something off-the-record, they just might tell you things candidly that are important to know, but that they're not going to tell to an app video recording that goes who knows where. And if you can get the candid OTR, those might lead to additional important information that you can officially capture.