MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by zwolbers | 2025-05-18 20:26:36+00:00
Just to chime in with another alternative - if you're open to using Linux, you might want to look into Viewport Panning with X11 [0].

It allows you to setup a larger virtual desktop that you can then pan around. Instead of moving your head around, you could instead just shift the viewport. Might be more convenient than a larger screen and/or monitor arms assuming you also setup zoom/display scaling.

By default, you pan by moving the mouse to an edge, but iirc you can setup key bindings and/or gestures.

[0] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/X/Config/Resolution#Panning_viewport
by iLemming | 2025-05-18 20:26:57+00:00
Younger folk and beginners keep ignoring Emacs (and Lisp in general), without the slightest attempt to even understand what kind of philosophy makes it appealing.

The profound difference lies in ontological fungibility – Emacs isn’t software you use, but cognitive clay that becomes an extension of your mind’s operating system. Where any specialized app is inevitably doomed to constrain you to some kind of constructed imagination of what note-taking/knowledge work should be, Emacs+Org erases the distinction between a tool and thought through radical philosophical pillars.

1. The Medium is the Message Paradox

Emacs rejects the app paradigm's fundamental axiom. Instead of being a "notes app" or "writing app", it's a meta-medium where:

- Your notes can spontaneously become a calendar event → spreadsheet formula → email draft → code compiler

- The act of writing is programming your environment (Org markup becomes executable functions)

- Tools aren't discrete entities but fluid expressions of your current mental state (e.g., I can run a shell command piping it to grep and then pipe the results into a text buffer)

1. Agency Through Textual Primordial Soup

By rooting everything in plain text + programmable buffers, you're working with the substrate of computation itself. Unlike database-driven apps that entomb your ideas in rigid schemas:

- Every thought remains perpetually protean – a TODO item can morph into a API documentation generator through markup alone

- You manipulate knowledge at the level of semantics (headings, tags, properties) rather than fighting GUI metaphors

- The friction between "taking notes" and "building systems" disappears – your journal entries are the configuration files of your life (I manage all my dotfiles — for Linux, Mac, home and work machines via Org-mode)

1. Compounding Selfhood

Specialized apps optimize for atomic efficiency; Emacs thrives on continuous identity investment. Each macro you write, each Org capture template, each minor mode becomes:

- A cognitive microhabitat that evolves with your thinking patterns

- Permanent infrastructure that pays compound interest (my 2010 Org config still works, while Evernote of 2010 is abandonware)

- A mirror of your epistemology – the keybindings/hierarchies are your neural pathways externalized

This creates an irreducible satisfaction: you're not just using tools but cultivating a personal universe where every interaction leaves permanent fertile ground for future growth. The specialized app user lives in rented apartments; the Emacs devotee walks through an ever-expanding mansion whose rooms rearrange themselves to their thoughts.
by brig90 | 2025-05-18 20:27:01+00:00
That’s a really interesting question — and one I’ve been circling in the back of my head, honestly. I’m not a cryptographer, so I can’t speak to how feasible a brute-force approach is at scale, but the idea of mapping each Voynich “word” to a real word in another language and optimizing for coherence definitely lines up with some of the more experimental approaches people have tried.

The challenge (as I understand it) is that the vocabulary size is pretty massive — thousands of unique words — and the structure might not be 1:1 with how real language maps. Like, is a “word” in Voynich really a word? Or is it a chunk, or a stem with affixes, or something else entirely? That makes brute-forcing a direct mapping tricky.

That said… using cluster IDs instead of individual word (tokens) and scoring the outputs with something like a language model seems like a pretty compelling idea. I hadn’t thought of doing it that way. Definitely some room there for optimization or even evolutionary techniques. If nothing else, it could tell us something about how “language-like” the structure really is.

Might be worth exploring — thanks for tossing that out, hopefully someone with more awareness or knowledge in the space see's it!
by not_your_vase | 2025-05-18 20:27:58+00:00
The last time I worked on a localized project, we had a technical fake language present in non-release envs. It was generated with every build (it was just a simple .po file, so easy to handle), and it was the same as English, but had an "x" at the start and end of each text, so you knew that it was "translated" (or at least it was translatable, and not hardcoded). QA included checking this fake language - if they found any text without X's around it, it was a clear sign of a i18n bug.
by gitremote | 2025-05-18 20:28:43+00:00
> Working remotely means there's some higher bar for quickly bugging a colleague, since you have no idea if they're casually reading their emails or if they're in deep focus.

Odd. Even when working in office, I messaged colleagues, because it is less disruptive than walking up to their desk to interrupt them. They can manage when they are available to respond, asynchronously or synchronously. You need to follow the No Hello (https://nohello.net) protocol, though.
by ajb | 2025-05-18 20:29:13+00:00
Acorn just plain didn't have the manpower. They failed to effectively enter the international market and so other companies with a wider customer base out-invested them.

They had a UNIX clone in 1988. The guy that did the kernel, Mark Taunton, used it for his daily driver until some time after 2000 but they never ported their GUI to it.

The internals of riscos were creaking by the end; it didn't have a proper library system and only had cooperative multitasking. There was an internal project ('galileo') to replace it, but it suffered from second system effect and NIH and never saw the light of day.
by adamcharnock | 2025-05-18 20:29:36+00:00
The very moment I saw the letters ‘MMX’, a long forgotten part of my brain woke up and said, “I know what that smells like!”

Which is bizarre. But to me it is (apparently) the small of new electronics, plus perhaps the ‘hot dusty things’ smell. It also comes with the memory of playing Pod (a racing game), by Ubisoft (I think). Good teenage memories!
by khimaros | 2025-05-18 20:30:04+00:00
i find myself requesting this whenever i see a new minimalist browser pop up:

it would be great to standardize alternative browsers on a consistent subset of web standards and document them so that "smolweb" enthusiasts can target that when building their websites and alternative browsers makers can target something useful without boiling the ocean

i personally prefer this approach to brand new protocols like Gemini, because it retains backward compatibility with popular browsers while offering an off ramp.
by KennyBlanken | 2025-05-18 20:30:09+00:00
"I doubled up the relays feeding the main motor and the heating coil, which gives a lot more headroom on the amperage"

...That's not how that works. One of the relays is going to close first, and those set of contacts will take all the load. Similarly, one set is going to bear all the drama from breaking the connection (and with the motor, there's inductive kickback.)

The correct way to do this is to look up the motor rating for your relay and then size accordingly, not to do dumb shit like "oh I'll just double up these two relays."

Of course he fucks up and uses a resistor from mains to logic, too. Mains and logic should never, ever, ever come anywhere near each other. They're supposed to be physically isolated on a PCB, cutouts in the board, even.

Don't fuck with mains / appliances / HVAC / household water supply if you don't know what you're doing. This guy has no fucking idea what he's doing, and some winter day he's going to come home to a house that's 100 degrees inside and a flooded first floor (notice he didn't connect the water leak sensor?)

Home insurance is scummy, annoying, difficult and weasely in the best of circumstances. The second they figure out you had some chewing gum and duct tape hodgepodge running your dishwasher and that's what caused the flood, they will not only refuse to pay, they'll cancel your coverage on the spot.

Then you find out the joys of not having home insurance coverage on a house with a mortgage.

Edit: Holy christ I missed this part: "It seemed to be due to the push-on jumper cables either becoming too loose after years of jiggling or perhaps oxidizing and self-insulating a bit."

That is how you start a fire, people.
by johnea | 2025-05-18 20:31:16+00:00
Two parts:

1) Isn't this like the study to determine why toddlers fall down? Answer: they aren't good at walking yet and loose their balance, duh...

Obviously the time and effort of raising an infant, and beyond, cause some prior relationships to fall by the wayside. Do we really need "science" to 'splain that to us?

2) While I've never lost a relationship specifically because my friend's relationship produced a child, I have lost several because of marriage.

In my case, the friend's wife just wasn't happy with them being on such close terms with someone else. They were forced to choose: me or her. I don't blame the (ex)friend for choosing her, but I do still miss those people.

3) OK, there's a 3. My closest friendships have survived multiple marriages and children. On my end and theirs.

I feel that when you're really close to someone, the relationship will survive pretty much anything.

I would also conjecture that those friends who left the new mother "out of their plans", weren't really that friendly at all. Friendship is a two way street. If the other party isn't determined to stay connected, maybe the "friendship" wasn't as close as you thought?
by azinman2 | 2025-05-18 20:31:26+00:00
> Maybe the best thing to do there is to let a little time pass and for them to see the result of their actions

This is most kids, myself included. I’m curious and have done well, but if I could have had essays written for me as a kid for sure I’d have tried. And I’d be off worse for it.

Kids also just want to eat sugar and play video games. As parents and a society, we both provide and force alternatives because as adults we know better.

You can lead a horse to water, sure, but you could also lead it to something filled with their worst instincts. Let’s avoid the later.
by nick0garvey | 2025-05-18 20:31:39+00:00
Hold the lock and write a row with timestamp at the time you read.

That row indicates you are the one processing the data and no one else should. When reading, abort the read if someone else wrote that row first.

When you are finished processing, hold the lock and update the row you added before to indicate processing is complete.

The timestamp can be used to timeout the request.
by mpweiher | 2025-05-18 20:31:45+00:00
I'll just point you back to my original post in this thread: yes, I used to even be very impressed by this, and also just accepted that there are two different but otherwise equal forms of communication.

I have since learned better. These two forms of communication definitely exist, for example Paul Watzlawick refers to them in axiom 4 of his 5 axioms of communication:

Human communication involves both digital and analog modalities: This axiom refers back to the use of non-verbals and system strategy explained in the first axiom. It is mostly related to the digital content of communication within a relationship

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Watzlawick#Five_basic_axi...

However, these are not co-equal. As I wrote, analogue communication can be very precise, you can often get very fine nuances across. But it is also always open to interpretation and hence error prone.

Precise but not accurate.

Since it is always open to interpretation, it simply cannot be used for verification, but that is exactly what some people use it for, especially women. This is understandable, but leads to catastrophe, because it is based on tuning in emotionally, so it fails horribly when the receiver is emotionally involved.

It's a common theme that otherwise really receptive and aware women fall for people who everyone else can clearly see are horrible. How? Reliance on analogue communication/"reading". It ain't reliable.

"However, analogue and digital in terms of communication have nothing to do with this physical definition of the term. When we communicate, analogue means that what is said is open to interpretation, it includes facial expressions and gestures and means non-verbal communication (e.g., rolled eyes, grimaces). Digital, on the other hand, means that what is said refers only to the factual content (e.g., the statement "the experimental report must be prepared") and leaves no room for interpretation."

https://www.iapm.net/en/blog/axioms-of-communication/#idx5

One of the areas where I learned to use analogue "communication" (receiving-side) is interpreting poems: you first leave yourself open, read the poem and let it induce feelings in you. That's the analogue part. Then you interpret those feelings the poem induced, and try to find out how the text did that.

If you just interpret poems "digitally", it probably won't work at all. If you just interpret it using your analogue receptors, your interpretation will be flat.

Combine both: that's the ticket!

But everyday communication is not poetry, and in particularly poetry is not a very good medium for verifying communication.

Anyway, I can highly recommend Watzlawick's writings.
by rad_gruchalski | 2025-05-18 20:31:53+00:00
> without the pseudocontroller

I am making an assumption. I assume that you mean the deployment. The deployment is responsible for individual pods. If a pod goes away, the deployment brings a new pod in. The deployment controls individual pods.

To answer your question: yes, you can simply create pods without the deployment. But then you are fully responsible for their lifecycle and failures. The deployment makes your life easier.
by jamespether | 2025-05-18 20:33:06+00:00
Security Level Assessment Configure and assess security levels across all dimensions of the CIA triad to establish your security baseline.

Compliance Mapping Map security controls to frameworks like NIST, ISO, GDPR, HIPAA, SOC2, and PCI DSS.

Business Impact Analysis Analyze financial, operational, and regulatory impacts of your security measures.

Cost Estimation Estimate CAPEX and OPEX for security implementations to support ROI analysis and budget planning.

Interactive Visualizations View security data and compliance status through intuitive interactive charts and dashboards.

Implementation Guidance Access detailed guidance on deploying and optimizing security controls based on industry best practices.
by mfranzs | 2025-05-18 20:34:17+00:00
This is what we've built RemNote for! You can add your sources (PDFs, websites, YouTube, etc.) and create cards directly from them. Either with AI (click on a sentence => get an AI card), or by highlighting a sentence and writing your own card.

It's not at the OS level, but I think a focused standalone all-in-one experience is actually better. We've explored a chrome extension here that does something similar to what you suggest, but it somehow hasn't proven useful in practice. I always keep coming back to just doing everything directly in the tool (upload PDF, take notes, make cards), as it helps me focus deeply on what I'm learning.
by curiousgibbon | 2025-05-18 20:34:21+00:00
It's entirely nonsensical to use O as a lower bound though. You could have two companies no growth whatsoever in value and correctly state that one has O(n) growth rate and the other has O(n^2) because a constant is both O(n) and O(n^2) (and O(n!) and O(exp(n^n)) ...). The author is trying to argue that there's some separation between two hypothetical startups' growth rates and as such an upper bound on one, say O(n), and a lower bound on the other, say Omega(n^2), is warranted. It sounds like you're not entirely an expert despite your recently-passed final. Strange concept, eh?
by Mate4 | 2025-05-18 20:34:40+00:00
Perhaps my perspective is skewed by working mainly in the office in a massive corporation and that a lot of these 'time wasters' are something that seem like an outcome of the environment: you need meetings to make sure you don't step on each other's toes (and there are many toes around), the pipelines take a long while because there's a lot of code that needs to be built, chatting with colleagues happens because sometimes the requirements are not entirely clear. In this utopia where there are no such external factors, I think a consistent four hour focused work day is feasible. But it does seem too idealistic.
by WhyNotHugo | 2025-05-18 20:34:41+00:00
At first I had to count characters. Over time, it becomes intuitive. In the same way that if someone holds up three fingers you don't count "one, two, three", you immediately perceive that they are holding up three fingers.

For numbers under 10, I usually hit the right amount. For numbers around 30, I might be off by one to five, but move on from then. When I want to remove similar prefixes from multiple non-consecutive lines, I might use things like 31x, go to the next instance (maybe continuing a search with n), and press period.

Honestly though, if you're moving forward 31 characters, there's often an easier approach, like 4w (move forward three Words). Again, at first I had to consciously think about which combination to use. Over time it becomes second nature.

I still use jjjj sometimes. It's imperfect, but at least it's the human that's the limiting factor, and not the software.
by krick | 2025-05-18 20:35:24+00:00
I'm not really following the research, so it's rather a lazy question (assuming you do): does any of it follow the path Derek Vogt was suggesting in his (kinda famous) videos (that he deleted for some reason)? I remember when I was watching them, it felt so convincing I thought "Alright, it looks like there must be a short leap to the actual solution now."

Yet 10 years later I still hear that the consensus is that there's no agreeable translation. So, what, all this mandaic-gypsies was nothing? And all coincidences were… coincidences?
by gopher_space | 2025-05-18 20:35:38+00:00
> What's the chance that you'd even know to try though?

> [...] esoteric topics also give new ideas something to latch onto. Our brains are associative, and being able to look at a new thing and tie it to a few esoteric concepts is a bit of a superpower, even if the association is weak. The difference between knowing nothing other than how to learn and knowing what's vaguely potentially possible or not is weeks or months of research.

The only point I'd add to your paragraph is that this applies to every domain when you're on the job, not just math. I live in constant terror of discovering that other disciplines solved my problem like a hundred years ago.
by ezst | 2025-05-18 20:35:44+00:00
> I've noticed that trillium has hierarchical notes; is there a view to look at an item higher on the tree and have it also have the contents of all its children?

You are right that the "atom" of content is the block in an outliner and the Note in Trilium. If you can tolerate⁰ the coarser-granularity, you can make Trilium behave pretty closely to an outliner: notes can be embedded within notes, either manually, or via the "Book" note-type¹ (that essentially renders a tree as embedded notes), hoisting² should be a familiar concept then.

⁰: when researching the topic, I immediately fell in love with outliners, thinking I would never go back to a note-based approach like Joplin which I was using then, but here I am, promoting a note-based solution. Metadata/tags at block level is not something I could get the hang of (I know how to manage collections of notes at scale, but not collections of blocks). ¹: https://triliumnext.github.io/Docs/Wiki/book-note.html ²: https://triliumnext.github.io/Docs/Wiki/note-hoisting.html
by nis251413 | 2025-05-18 20:35:56+00:00
Big-O notation is about asymptotics. You have to approach something, and typically there is some infinity involved because if it is not, then you can just compute things instead of giving asymptotic approximations, or else you have 10^10*n and 0.001*n^2-10^20*n and the big-O asymptotics at infinity are useless for smaller numbers. I understand what OP tries to say but that's not really a good framing point for many reasons. If you want to talk about a finite period of time, use a regression model, not asymptotics. But that's probably also a more personal preference around using mathematics colloquially but also in a manner that is not a good metaphor and does not correspond with what the mathematical theory is referring to. And I am not sure at all whether it is very well understood "what part of the graph we're talking about", in the sense that the modern organization of economy is far from acknowledging the fact that resources on earth are actually finite. Talking about O(n) and O(n^2) or O(exp(n)) as if growth can be indefinite comes with a specific kind of mindset, and the frame used reflects this type of mindset.
by Buttons840 | 2025-05-18 20:36:01+00:00
I would pay for an e-ink tablet dedicated to notes and spaced repetition. (I know there are e-ink note taking tablets, but none of them have spaced repetition.)

I'd like to be able to take freehand notes, and then be able to block out, or blur, certain sections and each blocked or blurred area becomes a spaced repetition entry.

Or, in more detail. I'd like to look at a page of notes and loop select a certain area. That selected area becomes a spaced repetition item. After the initial loop selection I can do another loop selection to blur one or more areas that would be blurred. Etc, etc.
by lzbobr | 2025-05-18 20:36:09+00:00
Hey HN, Zheng here—CTO & co-founder at Enzzo. We're launching next week on Product Hunt and wanted to share it here first. If you've ever found yourself stuck writing PRDs at 2 AM or juggling endless competitor tabs, we've built Enzzo for you—an AI teammate specifically made to simplify and speed up your PM workflow.

Enzzo is an AI-first product management assistant specifically designed to help software PMs move faster—from initial concept to detailed product requirements, customer personas, competitive analyses, and documentation, all in hours instead of weeks. It's not replacing PMs—it's built to amplify your existing capabilities, automating repetitive tasks so you can focus more on strategic decision-making, customer insights, and building better software.

Key highlights for software teams: - Quickly generate detailed PRDs, specs, and user stories - Instant AI-driven competitive analyses and customer personas - Risk detection and mitigation planning to avoid surprises - Seamless integration with your favorite tools (Jira, Confluence, Notion, Slack)

Unlike general AI tools like ChatGPT, Enzzo uses specialized AI agents, each trained explicitly for product management tasks—significantly reducing hallucinations and improving accuracy.

I'd genuinely love your thoughts—what's the one repetitive PM task you wish you never had to do again? We're eager for feedback from PMs managing software or hardware, from scrappy startups to large enterprises. Thanks for checking us out!