MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by mystified5016 | 2025-05-11 01:42:40+00:00
The common shortcuts do work in 99% of situations. The primary exception is terminals.

The problem is mainly that Linux has two clipboards running simultaneously, with slightly different behaviors.

In reality, the clipboard works fine. There are some gotchas, but for everyday use it's perfectly fine. The opinion expressed by parent comment is, uh, unconventional. I've never heard this take before. Most people consider Linux clipboards an annoyance that we should fix someday, it's not a showstopper by any means (for average users)
by matheusmoreira | 2025-05-11 01:42:52+00:00
I like your style, "lol" is the appropriate response to the notion of losing Google's entire list of products.

Android? It's not a big loss. It's no longer the open platform it used to be. Hardware remote attestation will get us locked out of every app if we "tamper" with our devices. It's just a shitty version of iOS now so who cares?
by 90s_dev | 2025-05-11 01:43:05+00:00
So your refutation of Aquinas's reasoning is that he starts on a foundation of Artistotle, and Aristotle (a pagan non-Christian) has shaky foundations? Why did you leave out the fact that Aquinas didn't cite Aristotle as infallible, nor rely on Aristotelian foundations as such, but rather took Catholicism as a starting point, which is inherently a-philosophical, and just tried to explain it using Aristotle as a starting point?
by padolsey | 2025-05-11 01:43:23+00:00
Interesting!

> People who don't pause exist more in their head than their body. The mind is top-down, rigid, quick, enforcing an established view. The mind is waiting for the other person to be done so they can say what’s rattling around inside. The body is slower, needs more time, and then words bubble up organically, one after another, without planning. People who exist more in their body are generally better at connecting emotionally with others.

I don't really understand this one.

Maybe there's a bit of a reductive or meaningless conflation here. A body can be fast while the mind is also fast. A body can be slow and pensive, and the mind follows. Being bodily 'in touch' does not equate to emotional sensitivity IME.

I am reminded of people whose bodies are dysfunctional or disabled or disregulated. I don't really see a correlation there where they have less emotional sensitivity. Often the opposite. I am then reminded of people who are hyperactive and always want to be moving. One might say they 'exist more their body' but they might often be impatient and inattentive in conversations..

Maybe I'm misunderstanding the author?
by ninth_ant | 2025-05-11 01:43:56+00:00
Fragmentation is only one of the problems. The bigger problem is that these devices are still largely toys for hobbyists. This isn’t an insult… I’m one of them, I have a variety of fun little arm and riscv boards.

Lack of mainline kernel support and other standards will hamper their widespread adoption. But as the market matures and shows real commercial potential this will start to be financially worthwhile for the vendors to address.

So your assessment is correct for today’s market. But with China being hammered by the trade war, it’s all but certain their industry will accelerate their efforts to have fully domestic tech solutions — and the same will be true of Europe and other parts the world as well.

All it takes is one of them to embrace standards to get more commercial success, and then the others will copy and chase them.
by lolinder | 2025-05-11 01:44:09+00:00
Are you a native English speaker?

"does NOT constrain user's rate limit" should be "does NOT rate limit incoming requests" or similar.

"We will try out best" should be "our best".

"when our servers are under high traffic pressure" is at least grammatical, but it's awkward. Normally you'd say "when our servers are dealing with high load" or something similar.

"your requests may take some time to receive a response from the server" is again grammatical but also awkward. "Our response times may be slower" would be more natural.

The last sentence is also awkward but the whole thing would need to be restructured, which is too much for an HN comment.

Basically: everything about this screams English as a second language. Which does mean that it's unlikely to have been LLM generated, because from what I've seen DeepSeek itself does a pretty good job with English!
by kragen | 2025-05-11 01:45:21+00:00
The ARPAnet (the electronic system) was never an internet (or catenet). It predated internetworking, and it was one of the networks comprising the internet we are using now (specifically, it was 10.0.0.0/8) until its demise in 01990. As a social institution, though, you are correct: the internet we are using now started out as an experiment inside the ARPAnet project.
by dangus | 2025-05-11 01:45:45+00:00
What a lame take on this.

To you the only implied solution is to just let Google eating all the money in the market?

Most of the products on your list are products that are or can be profitable on their own and have profitable competitors. Google could be broken up and Apple wouldn’t just take over the world as you assert.

Google wouldn’t just magically go out of business just because of the scenario you describe. They’d still command a huge part of ad spend because they’re a huge brand name. Even if competitors get a much-deserved leg up, it would take a whole lot of sustained momentum to unseat them.
by kevingadd | 2025-05-11 01:45:52+00:00
For those unfamiliar, Giant Bomb was one of the first video games press outlets to focus on premium video content. They offered monthly/yearly paid subscriptions for unlimited streaming/downloads: a mix of livestreams, review/criticism content, and Just Goofing Around pre-recorded content. They typically released a few hours worth of content a week at their peak, if I remember right, and the cost was something like $30-50 a year. This was before long form video was a big thing on YouTube; arguably sites like Giant Bomb were pioneers that showed a path forward (at least temporarily) for lots of creatives.

Their podcast has been running weekly for the entire time the site has operated alongside (intermittently) other podcasts, so they're approaching 890 episodes. Each episode was typically a few hours long as well.

When they were doing good they were a well-oiled content machine operating on a small budget with a small team. A lot of the stuff they put out was really special or unique in games press at the time - for example, one of their staff went to North Korea during a vacation so during one of their weekly live streams they devoted a time slot to him showing his photos and talking about his experiences there.
by _mlbt | 2025-05-11 01:47:30+00:00
> Skip supports both native mode - in which your Swift is compiled natively for Android - and transpiled mode - in which your Swift is converted to Kotlin. The mode is specified at the level of a Swift module. Each mode has strengths and weaknesses, and it is common to use both native and transpiled modules within a single Swift-on-Android app.

https://skip.tools/docs/modes/
by makeitdouble | 2025-05-11 01:49:15+00:00
> as good

This is a point that will be recurring and merits more thought IMHO.

Google services are mostly better because they crushed competition. Cutting their advantage will also mean better alternatives (money will flow to competitors instead of being sucked by Google).

As an analogy, it's like athlete doping: they sure were faster than the other athletes, but that's part of the issue.
by mrcsharp | 2025-05-11 01:49:22+00:00
> "In HTTP+SSE mode, to achieve full duplex, the client sets up an SSE session to (e.g.) GET /sse for reads. The first read provides a URL where writes can be posted. The client then proceeds to use the given endpoint for writes, e.g., a request to POST /a-endpoint?session-id=1234. The server returns a 202 Accepted with no body, and the response to the request should be read from the pre-existing open SSE connection on /sse."

This just seems needlessly complicated. Performing writes on one endpoint and reading the response on another just seems so wrong to me. An alternative could be that the "client" generates a session id and the start of the chat and make http calls to the server passing that ID in a query string or header. Then, the response is sent back normally instead of just sending 202.

What benefit is SSE providing here? Let the client decide when a session starts/ends by generating IDs and let the server maintain that session internally.
by zelphirkalt | 2025-05-11 01:50:17+00:00
YouTube sucks in terms of usability. It only survives, because it is at no cost except for ads viewing and not even that, when using uBlock Origin properly and because of most of the content being there. Other than that is has become so enshittified, it is one of the worst sites I visit.

Gmail and Docs are children's toys for people, who don't know much about e-mail and proper documents. Those are the majority of people on the Internet these days though, so Gmail and Docs are going nowhere any time soon.
by raron | 2025-05-11 01:51:10+00:00
This may be a language / translation problem.

> a connection is indirect if equipment is placed between the terminal and the interface of the network

If I check the official version in my native language, that (translated back to English by me) explicitly says:

> in the case of indirect connection there is an additional equipment/device between the terminal equipment and the interface of the network

If we assume that the the interface of the network is the optical or copper cable and the terminal equipment is your router, then (at least to my understanding) this additional equipment could be the modem of the service provider. The EU law doesn't speak about active or passive status of these equipments.

Maybe the Dutch law is stricter?

If you google translate the official French version to English via Google Translate, you got:

> a connection is indirect if a device is interposed between the terminal equipment and the interface of the public network

From German:

> in the case of an indirect connection, a device is connected between the terminal equipment and the interface of the public network

From Dutch:

> a connection is indirect when a device is placed between the terminal equipment and the network interface
by beloch | 2025-05-11 01:51:40+00:00
Comparing it to the industrial revolution is pretty direct. The industrial revolution resulted in a huge leap forward in the quality of the average human life... eventually. It took a while to distribute the gains equally. Initially, it was a big step down and a huge increase in suffering for a lot of people. It took social advances to make technological advances work for (nearly) everybody.

Improvements in AI may eventually improve quality of life for the majority of people, but we may go through a phase where a few people reap huge rewards while most suffer a decrease in their quality of life. Getting ahead of the problem, from the social side, could reduce the short-term suffering.
by SunlightEdge | 2025-05-11 01:52:00+00:00
I do think some people are very good at reading others. And I also think that as we generally don't see ourselves we may not realise how we come across. There is a huge amount of information we send out by how we hold ourselves/talk etc.

Personally I think I am very good at reading people's internal state. But I also am aware that I can be wrong. Reading someone who is very quiet for example can be hard and more prone to error.

When I talk with someone I often do assess how much turn taking they do, particularly with a stranger. When I'm really engrossed in a conversation or I'm with a good friend I can sometimes turn off this assessment.

Final point - the article was a great read. I'd have been really interested in their views on gender differences in communication (there can be differences).
by vFunct | 2025-05-11 01:52:01+00:00
It literally does. Billionaires don't exist without everyone else also becoming wealthier.

It's why China was able to eliminate extreme poverty while creating hundreds of billionaires.

You may think this inequality is unfair, but economics isn't concerned about inequality. Why? Because inequality doesn't matter. What only matters is poverty, and the elimination of it.

And I always find it hilarious that socialists can never say "I want to eliminate poverty"
by Jach | 2025-05-11 01:52:49+00:00
I've had the lucky position to be able to think positively about a lot of the tech and gaming layoffs in the last couple years for pretty much this reason -- that we'll eventually look back on them as unleashing a lot of previously locked up potential. On the other hand there are people at google and elsewhere who get paid to do important maintenance work, not requiring much innovative thinking, but if they leave/are laid off that work just stops happening, and something valuable is lost. On the other other hand, if AI keeps getting better at a similar pace as the last 5 years, none of this will matter on global economy-doubling timelines of ~15 years.
by voidmain | 2025-05-11 01:53:43+00:00
The article says the spheres will be at 500-600m depth, so something like 50-60 atmospheres of pressure. Compressing air enough to displace water at that pressure would heat it to extreme temperatures which must be very inefficient even with some attempt to recover the heat. Water being incompressible can I assume be moved in and out of the sphere without any heating (and, therefore, energy loss).

(I'm guessing, of course)
by int_19h | 2025-05-11 01:54:05+00:00
> But on the business side, there are 6 million businesses that use Google Workspace to manage their company - their drives, documents, email, distribution lists, SSO, etc. They can't just flip a switch and migrate their entire company to another provider.

Sounds like it'll be plenty profitable as a business in its own right, then.

> Off the top of my head, imagine the billions of people who have used Google SSO to sign up for random websites, and imagine that just stops working.

Why would it suddenly stop working? Lots of third party websites use Google (or Microsoft) SSO.
by mindslight | 2025-05-11 01:57:03+00:00
So you were merely rephrasing the same "both sides" false dichotomy in terms of yet another abstract concept, to continue rationalizing your support for fascism? If the system of autocratic authoritarianism has merit on its own, then why the need to continually sugar coat it?

At least Yarvin had the guts to advocate for autocracy directly (old Yarvin, that is. before he got corrupted by the taste of power).
by tw04 | 2025-05-11 01:57:40+00:00
I work in security. I have had customers request this feature. I have asked them to do an anonymous survey of users to ask what action they would take if they were blocked from taking screenshots and users universally say they’d take a picture of their screen with their phone.

I don’t underestimate friction, I just know even my grandma would reach for her camera for a picture of her screen and she doesn’t even know what a screen capture is. It’s a stupid feature that doesn’t create friction, it just encourages users to take an untraceable action.

I would FAR prefer recording who took a screenshot than blocking it as a presenter.
by bloaf | 2025-05-11 01:58:54+00:00
> No, it just claims that human souls are created differently than animal souls

That's... not much different than what I said (which was that humans are extra special)? I think it was in the early 1900s that the church Magisterium finally said that human souls belonged to different "orders" than plant and animal souls. And hey, wouldn't you know it, but the "orders" spelled out by the Magisterium broke exactly along the lines Aquinas laid out in the Summa. That's why I singled him out.

Re evolution:

The church excommunicated at least one scientist for early work on evolution: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregorio_Chil_y_Naranjo
by aantix | 2025-05-11 01:59:09+00:00
My first home computer was an Apple 2+. That was 1992 - so it was old and dated then, but my parents got it for $150, which was the right price range at the time for the family.

Luckily the guy selling included all sorts of manuals with it, which helped me to learn programming.

I remember a terminal program I used to connect to local BBSes - I would press the forward key and that would inverse the capital character display on the screen (white bg, black letter), denoting that a capital character was sent, not lower case.
by zpeti | 2025-05-11 01:59:17+00:00
> Initially, it was a big step down

Is this really true though? Being an agricultural feudal society is much much worse than the dreamy view we have of farming these days, and almost everyone even today chooses to work in a factory rather than a farm if they have that choice, in china, Africa, everywhere.

We have this image of gloomy coal powered cities being the worst place possible but in fact it was still better than the alternatives
by kcplate | 2025-05-11 02:00:22+00:00
According to the Homeland Security tweet actually linked in the article as evidence of his deportation…he received due process when a federal judge ordered his deportation. After which…he was deported.

So…like I said…who you going to trust? The government, the media, the hackers? All are bad actors here. Ain’t no one here with clean hands…including you by suggesting that due process wasn’t provided when the article you are commenting about actually said that it was.
by j-a-a-p | 2025-05-11 02:01:52+00:00
> Feeding someone who is hungry or not feeding them when they cannot provide for themselves is a moral question.

There are many examples of programs where people are structurally fed. None of these have positive results, and all of them are based on quasi moral arguments. Yes, we don't want people dying of hunger in refugee camps nor we want children falling behind in class because of their failing parents. But there is nothing moral about choosing the easy way out of the problem.
by joe_the_user | 2025-05-11 02:03:15+00:00
Yeah, the unfortunate thing is reigning in one monopolist today seems like more an invitation to the other monopolists.

How many potentially world dominating mega-corps are there? Google, Apple, Microsoft, Facebook, Amazon, Musk-corps, OpenAI, Nvidia...

It seems like any reasonable rejigging of things would require attacks on multiple sources of monopoly. And any other attack on a given player is just going to strengthening other players.
by kragen | 2025-05-11 02:04:39+00:00
As I understand it, you can use slower carry propagation techniques in parts of a design that aren't on the timing critical path. Speeding up logic that isn't on the critical path won't speed up your circuit; it just wastes space and power.

Clock dividers (for example, for PLLs and for generating sampling clocks) commonly use simple ripple carry because nobody is looking at multiple bits at a time.
by dragonwriter | 2025-05-11 02:05:17+00:00
> I see they publish this in five languages (de,en,es,fr,it). I'm slightly bummed they don't have a Latin version

The Vatican doesn't tend to translate current documents or speeches into Latin, though certain kinds of documents are, by tradition, issued originally and authoritatively in Latin and those are translated into other languages. This speech was given in Italian, so...
by jaas | 2025-05-11 02:05:18+00:00
> We also tested Rustls and its rustls-openssl-compat layer. Rustls could be an interesting library in the future, but the OpenSSL compatibility application binary interface (ABI) was not complete enough to make it work correctly with HAProxy in its current state.

Rustls is actively working on improving the OpenSSL compatibility layer. Hopefully we'll have it fully working for HAProxy soon!

We've also invested a lot in performance. Next week we'll be publishing a blog post about Rustls server side performance. Since it's relevant to discussions about TLS stack performance, here's a preview:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xFoRjb7pn4ZtL5BH7_ZwXNgN...
by saidinesh5 | 2025-05-11 02:06:28+00:00
Honestly, while growing up.. There's something really amazing about the intuitiveness of tools like Macromedia Flash, Visual Basic, Audacity/even FL Studio that we've had so many people being able to pick up these tools without having to resort to so much documentation/tutorials.

I don't think I could've done that with any of the HTML5 / Web tools that were touted as an alternative at that time... Or probably even today. I mean sure there's MIT scratch that does half as many things as visual basic. But i feel like we need a little more "mature" tools that fill these gaps. I could be wrong and there's much better replacements these days..
by ajross | 2025-05-11 02:06:30+00:00
You responded to a parenthetical. The point was about AT&T, not Microsoft. And yes, they effectively killed BSD, relenting only in the late 90's once it became clear that (post-Linux) there was little value left in Unix. In a different universe, they go to the mattresses with SysV against Windows NT and lose, and we have nothing.
by showerst | 2025-05-11 02:07:08+00:00
What a great article. My first exposure to real programming was VB and it’s hard to overstate how magical it was to just drag a button onto a form, and double click on it to write a few lines of code and wire it up. TBH it’s still something that I miss in the modern world, likely killed forever by the huge diversity of display devices.

It’s funny how lousy VB (and PHP a few years later) were as programming languages, even for the time. But they got stuff done, which is a good lesson.
by LorenPechtel | 2025-05-11 02:07:23+00:00
There isn't much loading at all.

Let's examine a vertical core through it: We have a top made of concrete, below that there is air, below that the ocean. This is a pure compression load on the concrete determined only by the amount of air volume, not the depth and thus the pressure the air is under. Make sure the mass of the concrete exceeds the mass of the water the device displaces.

In addition you need a skirt around the sides to keep the air from escaping. It experiences an outward force at the top and an inward force at the bottom, but both are once again based on the air column, not the pressure.

There's only one part of the system that actually must be beefy--the connection to the surface which will always be pressurized to the depth of the storage.

This is compressed air storage, but without the big waste that normally entails as the tank pressure changes. And without the big pressure vessel. I don't know what the round trip efficiency will be, compressed air usually is abysmal because a compressor will be designed for a given pressure and a turbine will be designed for a given pressure. Tank pressure below the compressor pressure is wasted energy, tank pressure above the turbine pressure is wasted energy. But this uses fixed pressure, they won't be mismatched.

This is the first mechanical system that I've seen proposed that sounds sensible. (Check the energy density for all the lifting approaches--abysmal.)