MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by AnthonyMouse | 2025-05-08 19:13:04+00:00
> I don't know what third candidate you think could have beaten both Trump and Harris in a three way race. "Someone else" is always a popular choice until the someone else turns out to be RFK Jr. or Vivek Ramaswamy or Kanye West.

Under the existing system, a three way race between Trump, Harris and Marco Rubio causes Harris to win because Trump and Rubio split the Republican vote. So the Republicans, in order to prevent this, only run one candidate. When that candidate is Trump and the Democrats choose Harris, oops.

Score voting is the thing they use in the Olympics. Voters rate every candidate on a scale of 1 to 10, highest average wins. Now if you add Rubio to the ballot, it only affects Trump's chances to the extent that Rubio could score higher than Trump. So there are no more primaries, every party just runs all their candidates in the general election.

Meanwhile Rubio will score higher than Trump among Democrats and not much if at all lower among Republicans, so Rubio defeats Trump. And if you put some Democrat the likes of Jared Polis on a general election ballot, he plausibly scores higher than Harris. If you had to flip a coin between Jared Polis and Marco Rubio, how is that not better than it being Harris and Trump?
by psunavy03 | 2025-05-08 19:13:17+00:00
"I have not encountered something" != "it does not exist." The logical conclusion to defying a government is people with guns showing up to put you in cuffs and take you to jail. Even over something as piddling as a littering fine or parking ticket . . . watch what eventually happens if you refuse to pay it.

People getting together and doing things as a community does not require a government. We can and should do that of our own free will. That's not to say governments aren't needed. But labeling them as "people getting together and doing things as a community" ignores their ability to enforce their laws, including the sanctioned use of violence or the threat of violence to coerce people into obeying or to punish them.
by krapp | 2025-05-08 19:14:05+00:00
He didn't.

He did say slaves should obey their masters, however. It's weird that Christians have no problem opposing slavery despite it being unambigiously supported by the Bible, and verbatim by both God and Jesus, but they absolutely cannot budge on homosexuality.

Even though the Bible only explicitly forbids sex between men, meaning the Church should have no stance whatsoever on lesbianism, yet they do. It's like they want to eat their cake and have it too.
by rcarmo | 2025-05-08 19:14:21+00:00
Oh, sure. I don't rely on the LLM to write all the code. I do "trust" it to refactor things to a shape I want, and to automate chores like moving chunks of code around or build a quick wrapper for a library.

One thing I particularly don't like about LLMs is that their Python code feels like Java cosplay (full of pointless classes and methods), so my SPEC.md usually has a section on code style right at the start :)
by mFixman | 2025-05-08 19:14:35+00:00
Francis was the most important supporter of liberation theology in Argentina, which was very ideologically aligned with the Kirchners. He was also strongly opposed to almost every politician who opposed the government.

Bergoglio had several conflicts with the Kirchner government when he was an Archbishop. Cristina didn't tell the position the government would take when he got elected Pope, but the government-aligned (but not government-controlled) mass media associations preemptively filled Buenos Aires with anti-Bergoglio propaganda.

A week later Cristina met the Pope and announced that they were politically aligned, and the same mass media associations filled Buenos Aires with pro-Bergoglio propaganda.
by nickff | 2025-05-08 19:14:59+00:00
My point was simply just that the USA was behaving democratically, but more like a parliamentary democracy (with a majority) than a republic. I agree that parliamentary coalitions are possible, they just don't seem very popular or stable in the anglo-sphere.

Italy and Israel also manage relatively stable minority parliaments! It's not impossible, but for some reason, the common-law countries seem to struggle with it. Autocrats often do champion stability (Putin/Xi) or change (Pinochet/Castro), but so do many democratic leaders (like prime ministers in Canada/UK).
by ralfd | 2025-05-08 19:15:14+00:00
Quora says:

> Interestingly, the Constitution does not specify whether the 14 years have to be consecutive, nor is the 14 years must occur immediately before the person becomes president. Herbert Hoover, for example, lived in London from 1910 to 1917, and when he ran for election in 1928, he had only lived, on his return, to the U.S. for 11 years. This did not disqualify him from the presidency.
by resource_waste | 2025-05-08 19:15:36+00:00
Suppose they 'filter out', and as a result, they don't get a job that they interviewed for. They wanted the job, or they wouldn't have applied.

They don't get approached at a social event, yet they attended to meet people.

They can say as many times "Its a filter", but the filter only hurt them. Not the other way around. Its a 'Grapes are sour anyway" situation.
by rowanG077 | 2025-05-08 19:15:54+00:00
I really don't think this matters. It's the processes beyond physical engineering that make it better. I have seen the most highly accredited software devs write the worst code. I have seen self-taught devs deeply consider implication of the things they are writing and solve the problem simply. And it's not even the case that I can perceive a trend. Well except for PhDs, I have met only one PhD that I know can write actual good code.
by zahlman | 2025-05-08 19:16:28+00:00
I genuinely don't understand what you're talking about. Should I not correct people when they say factually inaccurate things about a service I care about? Should I not point out that their use of a service is not aligned with the intended use of that service, or that a community already exists with differently aligned goals? Should I not point out that they are not in a position to override that community's purpose and vision?

Because I absolutely will not agree that other people should get to change what Stack Overflow is, simply because they think it should work like the other sites it was explicitly intended to provide an alternative to.

I'm trying my hardest here to be courteous and to consider all sides: the fact that the software doesn't work optimally for our goals; the fact that the site owners have unaligned interests (corporate ones around ad revenue and site traffic); the fact that key parts of the site software were poorly designed at the start and not properly re-evaluated and fixed (in particular, the reputation system, which saw only a passing attempt to invite meta-discussion and then no corresponding change); the fact that the site's UI affords misuse by looking too much like a discussion forum (compare and contrast Wikipedia: there's no sense that anyone is replying to anyone else except on the Talk and other meta pages, and the edit form is hidden behind a link).

For what it's worth, alternatives exist, and I prefer them. In particular, I use Codidact (https://www.codidact.com) and I consider that its design has fixed many problems with the Stack Exchange network. But fundamentally, these kinds of Q&A sites are meant to work a certain way in the main Q&A space (although Codidact opens up the possibility of parallel related spaces, not just meta). They are fundamentally and crucially not a place to just ask something because it's on your mind (or with the specific intent of getting out of a bind), without heed to existing questions, and hope that someone addresses you personally. That's how traditional forums work, and ultimately the cause of all the things that made experts fed up with them and motivated to try something new in 2008.

I've written a lot ITT because there are a lot of misconceptions about Stack Overflow out there, and many of them are quite popular; and because the site itself is not very good at presenting the needed correct information.
by scoofy | 2025-05-08 19:16:35+00:00
I mean, WSB isn’t a serious place, but they have their moments. I just have no idea who would or even could “pump” the entire S&P 500. My best theory of the last month is just basic “sell in May and go away” theory where you get rosier fundamentals in spring because everyone buries the bad news in Q1 reports, but it’s more difficult to hide as the fiscal year actually happens.
by BeetleB | 2025-05-08 19:17:11+00:00
Feedback 1: The README really needs more details. What does it do/not do? Don't assume people have used Cursor. If it is a Cursor alternative, does it support all of Cursor's features?

As a non-Cursor user who does AI programming, there is nothing there to make me want to try it out.

Feedback 2: I feel any new agentic AI tool for programming should have a comparison against Aider[1] which for me is the tool to benchmark against. Can you give a compelling reason to use this over Aider? Don't just say "VSCode" - I'm sure there are extensions for VSCode that work with Aider.

As an example of the questions I have:

- Does it have something like Aider's repomap (or better)?

- To what granularity can I limit the context?

[1] https://aider.chat/
by zsoltkacsandi | 2025-05-08 19:17:38+00:00
> By which I mean in the context of the article, which I think dismisses microservices as a potential solution with prejudice

> What I seem to be coming up against when discussing this is people conflate worthwhile evaluation with worthwhile solution.

> It doesn't equate to saying microservice is the solution if it meets that one criteria, only don't rule it out.

I read the article, it's not against microservice architecture itself, but points out that you shouldn't treat them as a starting point or a best practice.

There is even a section named "When Microservices Do Make Sense". It also highlights examples where microservices make sense ("Their post is a good example of how microservices can work when you have the organizational maturity and operational overhead to support them."), so I really do not see where does anyone rule out, dismiss, come up against anything.

I somewhat understand and agree what you are trying to argue against, but that's definitely not in this article.

> Its a good rule of thumb that you may want to evaluate if a microservice is appropriate.

This is too general to be practically useful — it applies to almost everything in life.
by BizarroLand | 2025-05-08 19:17:41+00:00
Real talk, the point is not that whatever system is first past the post for fusion becomes the gold standard and fills the planet.

The issue right now is cracking the code. Once that is done, performance gains and miniaturization can take place.

Fusion can work on lots of things. Its possible that a fusion system the size of a car could be made within 25 years of the code being cracked that would power a house, or the size of a small building that could power a city block.

The waste product of hydrogen fusion is helium, a valuable resource that will always be in high demand, and it will not be radioactive.

And yes, it will need coolant as with hot fusion the system uses the heat to turn a turbine, but that coolant isn't fancy, it's just water.

Fusion has the potential to solve more problems than it causes by every metric as long as it is doable without extremely limited source materials, and this is what these big expensive reactors are trying to solve.
by yencabulator | 2025-05-08 19:17:50+00:00
> There are cascading impacts of these decisions as well, a field which is 48px tall must have a significant amount of padding around it as well, to look balanced with the field size.

My podcast app shows a list of episodes etc as just rows with only subtle horizontal lines separating them (no "cards"). There's 3-4 lines of text with just a little bit of whitespace inside each block, a button on the right, and dragging the row left/right shows more buttons. Below the Android-global-convention top nav there's room for 7 episodes on my phone's screen size. I genuinely wouldn't want the text to be any smaller. The screen is not wide enough to use a multi-column grid without wrapping episode title text like crazy. Thus, the only way to compact that more vertically would be not showing as much metadata (date, download size etc seem unnecessary; maybe pinch-zoom to expand details of a single row when wanted). I could accept that, but even then given my not-great eyesight, the icon and episode title take up as much vertical space as the button. As long as it displays a recognizable icon, a two-line title, and duration and current offset, the button will fit just fine.

Mobile just has inherent limitations, both because of small screen size and because of inaccurate pointing.
by alabastervlog | 2025-05-08 19:17:55+00:00
Boiled down, all I'm really claiming is that some rich people spent a bunch of money on lobbying, largely in favor of making money better for buying influence and in favor of making it easier for the rich to get richer with some populist culture-war-stoking side-quests to drum up the necessary votes, and the effort was pretty successful. I don't think that's an out-there or "conspiracy like mind"ed take, especially given that's just... what happened.
by Aloisius | 2025-05-08 19:19:16+00:00
No. Capital expenditures are profit (or really, count towards earnings).

They're long-term investments in fixed assets, not expenses that get subtracted out when calculating net income. You're just swapping cash with assets of equivalent value, so profits don't change.

I'm not sure how PG&E would possibly not increase their profits if they got a rate increase meant to cover infrastructure investments. If they spend 100% of that increased revenue on infrastructure, then 100% of that counts towards profit - not in the future - immediately.
by ranger207 | 2025-05-08 19:19:22+00:00
Even for things that are manufactured in the US, the products they make are still going to be more expensive than untariffed goods manufactured in China. The point of tariffs is that manufacturing is cheaper in other countries and so domestic manufacturers can't compete on price, so the tariffs add onto foreign prices until they're above domestic manufacturing prices. So even if magically there was a factory in the US tomorrow for every product manufactured in China, prices would still be higher with the tariffs than without
by krapp | 2025-05-08 19:19:24+00:00
> My take is that a Pope who's relatably "like them" will be more effective at reminding U.S. Catholics that they may need to choose between their faith and Trumpist idolatry.

I mean... they clearly already have. If Trump supporting Catholics haven't changed their mind by now I don't think an American Pope is going to convince them. And unless we're assuming a third Trump term I don't see what the point would be. The damage has been done.
by tptacek | 2025-05-08 19:19:28+00:00
You can (sort of) divide Catholic clergy into diocesan priests, who spend their careers managing the clerical hierarchy of a specific region, and religious-order priests, who belong to religious orders within the church --- the Jesuits, Franciscans, Augustinians, Dominicans, etc. The "religious" Clergy are thought to be in some sense less tied up in church politics.
by Cloudef | 2025-05-08 19:19:54+00:00
You would have to give up on global error set with sum types, unless you want to see the global error set bloat with the largest sum type. Also if the error payload needs allocating what are you gonna do? Allocating is no no no here. I know rust will just panic in OOM but zig chooses not to do that. Even if you allocated, since zig has no borrow checker the error handling becomes nightmare as you now have to deal with freeing the potential allocations.

Using out parameters for context, or diagnostic pattern like std does is not bad at all imo.

The only nice thing error payloads give you is better error messages in case of uncaught errors.
by andrewpareles | 2025-05-08 19:20:42+00:00
We think terminal tools like Claude Code are a good way for research teams to experiment with tool use (obviously pure text), but definitely don't see the terminal as the endgame for these tools.

I know some folks like using the terminal, but if you like Claude Code you should consider plugging your API key into Void and using Claude there! Same exact model and provider and price, but with a UI around the tool calls, checkpoints, etc.
by kazinator | 2025-05-08 19:20:48+00:00
Yes: the first position isn't special; the last is. The head of a compound noun in English is the last word. The thing denoted by A B C D is a D, first and foremost. The nouns A B C are modifiers applied to D, in the order C B A. They normally cannot be plurals.

Even when a plurate tantum such as "scissors" is used as a modifier in the non-head position, English speakers invent a singular form for it, giving rise to usage like "scissor blade".

The 1990 movie starring Johnny Depp could not have been called Edward Scissorshands.

(I would go as far as to suggest that "scissors blade", though widely used also, is a hypercorrection based on the forced idea that there is no "scissor".)
by mlyle | 2025-05-08 19:20:53+00:00
Hey, running into someone who is exceptional and having a fun story to tell about it is reasonable and doesn't deserve this negative energy.

That time I ran into Larry Bird, or just missed having dinner with Douglas Adams, or the time I talked to Jonny Kim-- they're little markers of time in my existence. I know they're not gods, and I've done pretty cool things myself, but I'm still in awe of the cool stuff they've done.
by kadoban | 2025-05-08 19:20:58+00:00
The bigger issue is probably being allowed to set up an arbitrary one at _all_ without approvals. Once you have one, redirecting it is maybe not the biggest issue? Could still be problematic though.

This story is quite old, security culture in tech was really quite basic and forgotten in a lot of places. I would hope that a similar thing would not be allowed today at anything like a big company.
by aipatselarom | 2025-05-08 19:20:59+00:00
"US Citizens"

"US Economy"

"US Job Market"

"US Military"

"US Policy"

And many other examples ...

But now that I read about it, when you use it as adjective you have to write as "U.S.".

If you want to throw the whole argument to the trash because it's missing two dots, well ... up to you.
by initramfs | 2025-05-08 19:21:47+00:00
I did not state Catholicism is an aesthetic. I replied to vFunct's comment "vFunct The whole Catholic aesthetic is amazing. Really is the tops." "with religion is more than an aesthetic." An aesthetic is using symbols and atmosphere, architecture, to create a beauty. A religion may use these objects, but also has values that do not depend on them.

Also, another person posted: " echelon "It truly is. As is the Ancient Roman aesthetic. There's a reason why Final Fantasy, Game of Thrones, Lord of the Rings, and many more fantasy series lean heavily into the look and feel."

So people suggesting video games and tv shows, even with lots of violence (particularly GoT) is an "aesthetic", is a lot more shallow than my basic point that religions aren't primarily aesthetic. Maybe you replied to the wrong comment.
by danielvaughn | 2025-05-08 19:21:56+00:00
I should’ve specified Tailwind UI. The book Refactoring UI explicitly says “use more whitespace than you think you need”, and that bit of advice is evident in all the components that Tailwind UI offers. They do look nice, but it’s become so heavily used that designers lean on it reflexively, rather than considering whether it makes sense in that context.
by MantisShrimp90 | 2025-05-08 19:22:12+00:00
Projects like this are great because open source versions need to figure out the right way to do things, rather than the hacky, closed, proprietary alternatives that pop up first and are just trying to consume as many users as possible to get a most quickly.

In that case, a shitty, closed system is good actually because it's another thing your users will need to "give up" if they move to an alternative. By contrast, an open ide like void will hopefully make headway on an open interface between ides and the llm agents in such a way that it can be adapted by neovim people like me or anyone else for that matter
by armitron | 2025-05-08 19:22:17+00:00
There are many independent implementations of the same idea (given how easy it is to implement) but all suffer from similar shortcomings:

1. uprobes can be expensive and add latency (they force a context switch and copy data), especially when the hooked functions are called a lot

2. EBPF is not widely available outside of Linux, requires elevated privileges (compared to a MITM proxy that requires no privileges and works with every OS)

3. Doesn't work with JVM, Rust, any runtime that doesn't use the hooked functions
by kubav027 | 2025-05-08 19:22:35+00:00
I have tried that and all issues were already reported. It still took them a few months to resolve it. See examples of last year serious bugs:

https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/PY-72046 https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/PY-79448 https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/PY-78077

I can't get how poetry support problems were introduced. They have made new patch release just before Christmas holidays which introduced major problem (IDE periodically updates package lock file). It took them 3 months to fix it. After a few weeks they reintroduced the bug and said that it is feature and added registry option to revert to old functionality. I still do not understand what is the reason for updating package lock file.
by ThrowawayR2 | 2025-05-08 19:22:37+00:00
You can accelerate the benefit of experience by paying closer attention to what your co-workers and immediate managers do when there's a crisis, disagreement, etc. Try to figure out what tactics they're using and think about how well or badly what they did worked. Also think what you would have done in their shoes and try to game out how others might have responded to that.

There's also plenty of books out there on people skills. 99% of them are rubbish but a few have stood the test of time, e.g. the Dale Carnegie books.
by hwillis | 2025-05-08 19:22:49+00:00
> Then they train a neural network on the correlations between their brain activity and the known images.

Not onto known images, onto latent spaces of existing image networks. The recognition network is getting a very approximate representation which it is then mapping onto latent spaces (which may or may not be equivalent) and then the image network is filling in the blanks.

When you're using single-subject, well-framed images like this they're obviously very predictable. If you showed something unexpected, like a teddy bear with blue skin, the network probably would just show you a normal-ish teddy bear. It's also screwy if it doesn't have a well-correlated input, which is how you get those weird distortions. It will also be very off for things that require precision like seeing the actual outlines of an object, because the network is creating all that detail from nothing.

At least the stuff using a Utah array (a square implanted electrode array) is not transferrable between subjects, and the fmri stuff also might not be transferrable. These models are not able to see enough detail to know what is happening- they only see glimpses of a small section of the process (Utah array) or very vague indirect processes (fmri). They're all very overfitted.