MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by lacker | 2025-05-12 00:28:23+00:00
I think most people who want to "opt out of AI" don't actually understand where AI is used. Every Google search uses AI, even the ones that don't show an "AI panel" at the top. Every iOS spellcheck uses AI. Every time you send an email or make a non-cryptocurrency electronic payment, you're relying on an AI that verifies that your transaction is legitimate.

I imagine the author would respond, "That's not what I mean!" Well, they should figure out what they actually mean.
by tap-snap-or-nap | 2025-05-12 00:28:27+00:00
Fishing used to be a skilled trade in the rivers, seas and the oceans until giant ships operated by multinational companies took most of the market share and the fish people could sell. You got the point, small ones (at least most) don't stand a much chance nor are they efficient.

Now these industries should only be treated as a hobby or something that is expected already like knowing English language for writing corporate emails.
by ghaff | 2025-05-12 00:28:45+00:00
I mean, even an hour west of Boston, there's a ton of hiking/canoeing/etc. mostly with free or cheap parking (have a free parking pass for state stuff). Mostly just do day-trips so not sure what camping spots run. But there's a ton of cheap/free stuff. No, it's not Yosemite though have a pass for national parks as well but plenty of nice stuff.
by shostack | 2025-05-12 00:29:06+00:00
Generally agree but they are laying the path to enshitification. You see you can get turn by turn directions on the HUD, but only through their app where they want you to pay $10/mo for the privilege. Same for inputting addresses into their crappy nav system.

So I only use Google maps with Android Auto now, but cannot put the turn by turn display on. Also, who knows what telemetry Mazda is sending home on me without me knowing or wanting them to. Probably selling it to data brokers.
by sandworm101 | 2025-05-12 00:29:42+00:00
That is why the US armed forces has a rep for being so young. Other countries they dont kick people out so easily, but promotions are also much more difficult. Talk to a canadian or a brit. It is not unussual for them to be in 30+ years. And i've met canadian army captains who have been captains for 20 years, giving them more experiance than most american LTCs.
by CommenterPerson | 2025-05-12 00:29:56+00:00
Ever heard of "Body language"? It's worth looking up "Nonverbal Communication" in Wikipedia. It's estimated 2/3rds of all communication is nonverbal. A therapist I know also mentioned something like this.

Many of the HN readers are developers. We want everything to be deterministic. If A, then B. 1+1=2. And so on. Hence the angst in some comments. The author may not be 100% correct everywhere. The examples seemed to get a little more judgmental towards the end of the list. But these are great soft skills to have, people! Next time you have a crazy user or boss, observe their body language. It might help.
by hn_throwaway_99 | 2025-05-12 00:30:58+00:00
You sort of touch on this, but I think it's pretty obvious that it doesn't make sense to value Tesla's insurance the same way you'd value an independent insurance company. They are an arm of a car company, designed to help them sell cars.

Furthermore, I bet the loss ratio isn't even really comparable to independent insurers. Tesla itself must make some money from their parts that are needed for repairs, not to mention that they are the entire beneficiary of repairs if you use a Tesla service center, so when you factor that in I wouldn't be surprised if Tesla's insurance arm is slightly profitable.
by strken | 2025-05-12 00:31:01+00:00
Cloudflare's actions seem to me to be similar to sending out letters saying "this client has been banned from using our services" using that client's own letterhead. Are they not misrepresenting the communication as though it's from the client, when really it's from Cloudflare? Sure, it's benign, but it's an unnecessary muddying of the waters.
by atombender | 2025-05-12 00:31:09+00:00
Hi, Erik! Nice to see this on the HN front page.

Have you considered using this as a test bed to explore alternative architectures and approaches? The classical Volcano architecture used here has been established for many decades, and it could be fun exercise to see what can be done to improve on it, while remaining true to the original goal of having something that's purely for educational purposes.
by JackFr | 2025-05-12 00:31:39+00:00
In commodities and certain derivative markets, hedgers need to be matched with speculators. Hedgers are offsetting risk to speculators. Thus a farmer can insulate themselves against a drop in the price of corn and an airline can insulate themselves against a jet fuel hike. To do that someone has to take that risk. It might by to satisfy their risk appetite which will be tied to returns.
by gruez | 2025-05-12 00:32:21+00:00
>businesses that consider themselves part of a community, and sell to their neighbors, don't want said neighbors to be rat-fucked by exploitative financial products, even if it will possibly benefit them at no risk.

>This is generally called "being a person with a soul."

Wholesome. So the hole in the wall restaurant that only takes cash was actually trying to save its customers from a lifetime of credit card debt, rather than saving the 3% interchange fee and possibly tax evade?
by nine_k | 2025-05-12 00:33:43+00:00
This has been tried, very honestly, and it mostly sucked, then crashed. The calculation argument [1] kills it. The optimization problem which the market solves in a chaotic and decentralized way through price discovery and trading is intractable otherwise, not with all the computing power of the planet. It also requires prediction of people's needs (ignoring desires), and it's a problem more ill-posed than prediction of weather.

The market of course needs regulation, or, rather, stewardship: from protection of property rights all the way to limiting monopolies, dumping, etc. The market must remain free and varied in order to do its economic work for the benefit of the society. No better mechanism has been invented for last few millennia.

Redistribution to provide a safety net to those in trouble is usually a good thing to have, but it does not require to dismantle the market. It mostly requires an agreement in the society.

[1]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_calculation_problem
by saghm | 2025-05-12 00:33:50+00:00
I have a similar model motherboard from ASUS in my desktop I had custom built a few years ago, and I've mostly just been annoyed that I have to have Windows installed to be able to even update the BIOS at all given that the previous one I had (which I think was also from them?) would just let me do it over ethernet if I booted directly into the BIOS setup menu. Now I have much larger concerns in addition to the risk of not updating as frequently seeming much larger...
by cesarb | 2025-05-12 00:35:37+00:00
> I think Microsoft just went with the idea that C++ was an improved superset of C so should be used even for C-style code.

And as a consequence, for a long time their official C compiler was stuck on C89, while other platforms already had full C99 support and beyond. I believe their support for newer C standards has gotten better since then, but AFAIK they still don't have full C99 support.
by p_ing | 2025-05-12 00:35:42+00:00
> rationale was usually the increasing difficulty and cost of maintaining security and ensuring compatibility with modern software and hardware on aging platforms

> they simply lack a specific relatively recent security chip or a sufficiently new processor architecture

Gosh, that sounds like the exact same reason! TPM is now leveraged not only for FDE but for OS-level security. And it's not "recent". Picking a random supported i3-8 series processor, it launched in Q4 '17, which of course has TPM 2.0 supported by it's chipset. That's eight years old. You couldn't run XP on an eight year old machine (not that we complained about upgrading given the delta between hardware performance at the time) -- the Pentium 233 launched in '97 and XP in '01.

> it remains unclear why Microsoft does not allow users to opt out of the enhancements if they lack the hardware.

Security has been a paramount concern of Windows, not only for Microsoft, but the public/corporations at large. Microsoft has taken a beating for security issues over the year, and now people are demanding to /opt-out/ of it so they can complain about their self-inflicted vulnerable OS down the road? Is it really that unclear to The Reg?

Windows has required upgrades in some form or fashion over the years. This is nothing new; the only thing new is processor performance has leveled out for most non-demanding uses. And reddit.

I suppose there are those users who disable Spectre mitigations because it gives them 0.5 fps in CS2.

The rest of the article is a nothing-burger. Just someone 'supposing' what could happen years from now when Windows 12 drops.
by rstuart4133 | 2025-05-12 00:36:47+00:00
> I love the speed,

Exactly. I tried it, my first impression was "it's vscode with vim's speed". But sadly not enough vim for me. Given I dropped vscode because it was responding too slowly to my keystrokes, made it compelling at first glance.

One thing I do often is compare things using vim diff mode. The problem with diff'ing things like tcpdump's is there is noise (like timestamps that make similar things look different). In vim you can :diffthis them, use vim's regex commands to eliminate the differences, and bingo where it when off the rails becomes obvious. Vim can't diff two git revisions natively, but it's command line is powerful enough to let you write a shell script to do it. Or for something completely different, you want to edit / view an encrypted file, again it's possible to write a shell script that tells vim to hold the decrypted version in RAM only so it doesn't leak to disk.

I lost too much in the end so I'm back to vim, but it looks so promising. I hope it matures into something a little more flexible that is easy to script. The articles comments about using CPU and disk I/O when idle are also a little concerning.
by koito17 | 2025-05-12 00:37:07+00:00
Line count is not very useful to compare without the context of standard library size, third-party dependencies, etc. The code in TFA depends[1] on a JSON library[2] that is about a thousand lines of code (excluding tests) wrapping a Java library for JSON decoding.

Then there's other things to consider, like the fact that this LSP client, while succinct, pays not only the cost of loading Jackson, but also the cost of loading clojure.core, which is quite non-trivial[3]. Startup time for LSP servers and clients definitely matters to some, considering that e.g. even clojure-lsp recommends running native executables over JAR files[4]. Can't find documentation proving it's for quick startup, but it's a plausible rationale for their recommendation of a binary over a JAR.

Note: I have used Clojure professionally and in hobby projects. I think it's nice that one can interactively develop a minimal LSP client and the resulting amount of work is roughly 200 lines of code. I say "minimal" because it's unclear how this client deals with offsets reported by LSP servers, which are all given as offsets in a UTF-16 encoded string. In any case, I still think advertising "LSP client in 200 lines of code" hides valuable information regarding functionality, implementation, "actual" code size, and trade-offs made in the choice of technology stack.

[1] https://github.com/vlaaad/lsp-clj-client/blob/a567e66/deps.e...

[2] https://github.com/metosin/jsonista/blob/c8f2b62/project.clj...

[3] https://clojure-goes-fast.com/blog/clojures-slow-start/#cloj...

[4] https://clojure-lsp.io/installation/#embedded-jar-legacy-exe...
by gerdesj | 2025-05-12 00:37:10+00:00
Excessive horning (made up word) is not just a Vietnamese thing. Italy is probably Europe's worst offender, with Greece a close contender.

I'm not so familiar with Asia, but I get the impression that the entirety of Indian and most of Chinese drivers feel the need to lean on the horn with gay abandon (fnarr).

In Britain the horn is generally reserved for "fuck that was close: I think you are a bit of a tosser" or "you are driving a German car and seem to have have no indicators".
by qq66 | 2025-05-12 00:37:20+00:00
> One reason is that someone’s or a company’s income doesn’t always align perfectly with when they want to buy things.

Financing should be used for things that provide value over the time horizon it takes to earn the money to fully pay for them. If you finance things for less than that time horizon, you just end up getting more and more underwater. If you finance something that delivers value for ~6 hours then you probably shouldn't be buying that thing or your fiscal solvency is really headed for the cliff.
by _bin_ | 2025-05-12 00:37:53+00:00
That's not parochial, that's realistic. If you have an axe to grind with American dominance that's your own bias; it's a fact, not something you can argue with on objective grounds. Keep your personal anti-Americanism out of this; it's keeping you from thinking clearly.

Christianity didn't have as strong an influence there and then, but it obviously did in the course of the Roman Empire, and this was around the time it started to grow. It's obviously relevant in a way cults of Mithras or Serapis or whomever else weren't.
by JumpCrisscross | 2025-05-12 00:38:02+00:00
> That's accurate, the DNS responses for these domains previously did, and still do, point to Cloudflare's WAF/CDN. They haven't said anything like '...never blocked access to customer content...'.

It’s accurate in that bullshit isn’t technically a lie. If they’re willing to do this, they’re potentially willing to use their CDN to MITM DNS requests. Because after all, they’d be leaving the DNS request unmolested while doing the dirty work on their CDN.
by majormajor | 2025-05-12 00:38:07+00:00
You have to be willing to not have things guaranteed to "work." Don't just look at the best case. Investigate and discuss how many versions of Bell Labs didn't "work."

If you just look at the success stories, you could say that today's VC model works great too - see OpenAI's work with LLMs based on tech that was comparatively stagnating inside of Google's labs. Especially if nobody remembers Theranos in 50 years. Or you could say that big government-led projects are "obviously" the way to go (moon landing, internet).

On paper, after all, both the "labs" and the VC game are about trying to fund lots of ideas so that the hits pay for the (far greater) number of failures. But they both, after producing some hits, have run into copycat management optimization culture that brings rapid counter-productive risk-aversion. (The university has also done this with publish-or-perish.)

Victims of their own success.

So either: find a new frontier funding source that hasn't seen that cycle yet (it would be ironic if some crypto tycoon started funding a bunch of pure research and that whole bubble led to fundamental breakthroughs after all, hah) or figure out how to break the human desire for control and guaranteed returns.
by easterncalculus | 2025-05-12 00:38:12+00:00
Sure, but a union is supposed to work better, so if it isn't, by definition it's to some degree corrupted. So it's important to remember that the union itself isn't a bad thing.

A union is supposed to provide for workers in the same way that a software company makes software. If either of them don't, there's something fundamentally corrupt about each org, not with the concept.
by hnthrow90348765 | 2025-05-12 00:38:15+00:00
>I would like someone to mythbust this belief as it seems like it runs off nothing but anecdotes.

It can't happen for everyone, which is why all wages need to rise to make living affordable and then some. Capitalists love these competitive filters while disregarding all of the people that failed, but still promote it as viable without disclosing success/failure rates (and as anecdotes often do).

A lack of awareness about the realities of starting a business - and the consequences of not succeeding - is repeatedly the dumbest thing I see espoused about going into the trades and is the equivalent of advertising some kid's anomalous yearly salary that includes overtime.
by nine_k | 2025-05-12 00:38:26+00:00
It's the statist idea. Socialism in practice usually involves regulating the market heavily, or into oblivion altogether, and giving the State a huge redistribution power. See my comment nearby on why such a setup fails to work.

A socialism where the only way to work is to own a part of an enterprise (so no "exploitation"is possible) would likely work much better, and not even require a huge state. It would be rather inflexible though, or mutate back into capitalism as some workers would accumulate larger shares of enterprises.
by calmbonsai | 2025-05-12 00:38:49+00:00
"This logic doesn’t change just because the thing being financed is a burrito."

Yes, it absolutely _does_ change. One might as well go all the way and start offering Oxygen or Water bonds. The immorality masking as morality here is insulting--not related, mortgage-backed CDOs during the financial crisis and "Pay Day" loans.

There are many, many fundamental individual needs and items (economic "utility") that, while financialization of them makes sense at the large scale (flood insurance, natural commodities trading, municipal infrastructure), makes zero sense (and is even amoral) on the individual and small scales.

Put another way, many bulk-health statistics (BMI, Blood Lipids, Heart-Rate) are useful to track for populations, but make little sense (and is wrong-headed) to extrapolate-down to the individual.

Just because you can, doesn't mean you should.
by s1artibartfast | 2025-05-12 00:39:53+00:00
It isn't just about appreciation. It is about utility and production.

A car loan can be a great investment if it gets you to a job you otherwise wouldn't have, even if it is going down in value.

Debt for an expensive degree that gets you a good job is the same, and entirely devoid of resale value. Debt for an expensive degree with no job prospects, not so.
by lucb1e | 2025-05-12 00:43:04+00:00
I bought several of those adapters. The issues are these:

0. They don't work on all models. Not product lines, e.g. not "all Pixel phones" or so, no, reviews mention "works with Pixel 3 but not Pixel 3a". You need to either waste a bunch of resources sending various ones back and forth, or scour listings until you find one where a review mentioned it works with the model you have. It turns out that all the ones I ordered work on the two USB-C phones I have by now (one from work, one privately) but...

1. The quality of the mic conversion is so bad that people cannot understand what I'm saying. It's described as though I'm speaking while holding the phone under water. Plugging the headphones into my work laptop makes it clear that the mic itself is not the problem, nor the meeting software or my WiFi or anything

2. Loose contacts in most of the converters, if not from the start then after a handful of uses. The headphone cable itself somehow doesn't have that problem, so I don't think that's a me problem (many reviews also mentioned it)

3. You can't charge at the same time. I've tried wireless charging but that makes the device overheat. There are adapter models that will let you also plug in a power cable, but I didn't buy one for some reason. Probably all of them had bad reviews about all of the aforementioned problems and I didn't find a single one that sounded like it was worth a try

4. You need to plug it in at the right time. One of the converters needed to be plugged in before joining the meeting. Another one after. The OS or meeting software (not sure) wouldn't route the audio correctly otherwise

And cheap phones manage to include headphone jacks somehow. It's just a status symbol when manufacturers exclude it from more expensive models, it doesn't seem to serve any purpose as the Zenphone 10 shows by having it and also being great on all other fronts -- except one.

> a 1000 Euro paperweight

It's actually 700€.

It does everything I want. After searching a few days for what models are small, have a headphone jack, and are capable of running Android 14 or so, I was so happy to find that the Zenphone 10 checked all boxes. Then I found out why it didn't initially show up: Asus was the manufacturer that I had previously excluded because you can't root the device. It's not your device: the manufacturer maintains control over what you can and cannot do with it. You can't make full-system backups, for example, because access to your apps' data folders isn't part of what they allow you. The device was easily worth the 700€ because it sounded like I could finally stop wasting my time on choosing which compromise I wanted to make (huge size, no jack, or old chipset were the main options). Finding out there was a dealbreaker after all felt like an ice bath. I just won't buy something where I can't access my own data and make a fricking backup
by selcuka | 2025-05-12 00:43:12+00:00
> It sounds like poorly designed database queries with unindexed joins.

I find it amusing that you think every database operation imaginable can be performed in less than 20 seconds if we throw in a few indexes. Some things are slow no matter how much you optimise them.

The GP could have implemented them as async endpoints, or callbacks, but obviously they've already considered those options.
by cadamsdotcom | 2025-05-12 00:43:19+00:00
In the mid to late 20th century seeds were planted; of ideas & inventions we now take for granted.

Then progress exploded! Quality of life massively expanded.

Now: a slowdown. Stuff still gets made yet we feel disenchanted.

It never stopped being a good time to planting more idea-seeds.

Tenure sounds a lot like basic income. Maybe it’s a coincidence.
by CalChris | 2025-05-12 00:44:50+00:00
Yes, those are the cold facts. I probably should have put superstar in scare quotes. But the con was that she was some sort of Stanford 'superstar'.

I looked over her bio on Wikipedia. Yeah, she certainly came from a rich + connected background. So she understood rich people and what they wanted to hear. However, I don't think her Stanford professors were implicated, at least as far as I've read. They didn't knock any sense into her but they also didn't co-sign.

But none of the adults raised alarm. I got into it once with a VC trying to say that Sand Hill was blameless. That was nonsense too.
by djoldman | 2025-05-12 00:45:21+00:00
> Imagine applying for a job, only to find out that an algorithm powered by artificial intelligence (AI) rejected your resume before a human even saw it. Or imagine visiting a doctor where treatment options are chosen by a machine you can’t question.

I wonder when/if the opposite will be as much of an article hook:

"Imagine applying for a job, only to find out that a human rejected your resume before an algorithm powered by artificial intelligence (AI) even saw it. Or imagine visiting a doctor where treatment options are chosen by a human you can’t question."

The implicit assumption is that it's preferred that humans do the work. In the first case, probably most would assume an AI is... ruthless? biased? Both exist for humans too. Not that the current state of AI resume processing is necessarily "good".

In the second, I don't understand as no competent licensed doctor chooses the treatment options (absent an emergency); they presumably know the only reasonable options, discuss them with the patient, answer questions, and the patient chooses.