MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by atoav | 2025-05-21 20:57:03+00:00
Don't get me wrong here, I am deeply interested in gear and sound, after all I design and build my own modular synthesizer modules, guitar pedals, speaker cabinets and so on.

So the reality of what forms a sound matters to me because I like to be in control of the result. And that means that I can't rely on the countless wrong poetic fantasies of people in the market to sell more gear, consisting of cosmetic stuff that doesn't impact the sound.

That does not mean I spend no time researching gear, quite the opposite. I just complained that what people think impacts their sound isn't what actually impacts their sound, because they have been given factually wrong mental models. And I know they are factually wrong because I experimented with applying them in practise.

E.g. one laughable mental model is sound per material analogy. You use silver in a cable (a good conductor at least), so that must therefore make for a "silvery" tone (typically they hear that in the high frequency range somewhere). Oh no the manufacturer used metal in the speaker enclosure? So now it sounds metallic and sterile. They used wood? Warm and rich. They used spongy mushrooms? Probably very psychadelic, you get the idea. Reasoning on the level of a kindergardener.

And that is it. No measurement, no blind A/B test, just mumbo-jumbo and fools who swear they could hear the gras grow if someone just tells them there was gras growing while the lawn is made of plastic.

For silver cables you can do a null test. Run the same signal through 5m of copper and 5m of silver and subtract one from another, while carefully making sure the levels match. The difference will be some noise down there at the edge of your audio interfaces recording capabilities. And that difference is absolutely inaudible. But what about the different higher conductivity of silver? Just use more copper. If there is any topic we know a ton about it is how electrons transmit charge in conducters and so far no impactful special frequency and dynamic-changing properties have been found in a piece of wire.

Meanwhile everybody skips room acoustics, cause that is boring and labour intensive and involves having to understand how complex sound behaves in confined spaces and how to measure that. And lets not ponder why Hifi people use unbalanced connections..

It is easier to sell someone highly pure silver cables than it is to sell them bass absorber their room would actually need to listen to the music some sound engineers mixed in decades ago on NS-10s.

TL;DR: I just find it sad that people can't just enjoy music listening or music making without buying into esotheric nonsense that does not describe reality as it is. Music is already magical. The hear it is made on and the stuff it is played back on is purely physical however. And that does not take away from the magic, IMO it adds to it.
by EdgeExplorer | 2025-05-21 20:57:14+00:00
"Hitting" with any of your friends is precisely the type of interaction I want to suppress. The way you know if what you say to your friends in real life is interesting to them is if they engage with it. If your feedback mechanism is anything other than the other side of a mutually interesting conversation, you probably aren't having ordinary conversation with friends. What real life feedback mechanisms most closely resembles likes? Applause. Who applauds? An audience.

Friends *can* give non-verbal cues in real life that they are interested (nodding, laughing, etc.), but likes are very much not like those non-verbal cues. Non-verbal cues only work in a very small group. There is no non-verbal cue that works to show interest in the context of "any of your friends" in real life. Emoji reactions in the context of a back-and-forth chat could work as non-verbal cues, but again, those are very different from drive-by likes with no additional engagement.

In this hypothetical social network, if you post something and no one responds to it or engages with it in any way verbally, you would be encouraged to do the same thing you would do in real life if you kept trying to talk about something in a group of friends and no one engaged with it verbally... find something else to talk about (or find a different group for that topic).

The goal is very much to mirror the experience of talking to your friends, but facilitated in a way that makes it more asynchronous and scalable (within the limit of your actual real life connections).

There are a lot of people in my life I would love to stay better connected with, but maintaining a direct chat can be difficult (what to say) and it doesn't always make sense to put people in group chats because the group might only make sense to me (people I used to work with that I actually like, for example). If I could post about what's going on in my life, what I'm working on, what I'm into right now, etc. and have my real-life friends opt-in to an actual conversation about that... well then it's much easier to stay in touch. I have no interest in knowing how many of my friends "like" what I'm sharing. If we aren't mutually talking to each other, we aren't engaging as friends no matter how much they may like it. They're just my audience if they have nothing to say back.

Sorry I didn't have time to make this shorter. My goal isn't to convince anyone of anything, just to share a perspective that might be interesting to you, OP or anyone else building something "social". You might sum it all up with the question: What if social media tried to be as much like real life friendship and as little like "influencing" as possible?
by glimshe | 2025-05-21 20:58:42+00:00
I'd like to go beyond this question... What if making cartoons is 99.9% cheaper and a reasonably skilled person could transform any story into a fully animated, quality-looking CGI cartoon with less than a week of work? We'd have a flood of cartoons, some of them from talented authors who can't afford to finance a cartoon adaptation today. Would that displace Disney and Dreamworks?
by gbukat | 2025-05-21 20:58:57+00:00
Hey HN

I’ve been managing my own infrastructure for years — mostly Linux servers on VPS providers and bare metal, all self-hosted in various environments. Over time, I realized that most of my days were being spent checking logs, SSH-ing into boxes, running the same commands, and basically living in fear of missing something important.

To make my life easier, I built Zuzia.app. It’s a lightweight tool for:

monitoring server health (CPU, RAM, disk, uptime),

scheduling and executing recurring tasks (like backups or status checks),

running one-off commands from a web dashboard (no SSH needed),

and sending alerts if something goes wrong.

It started as a personal script but turned into a full product because it just saved me so much time. I named it after my daughter, who used to sit next to me while I worked. The project now has a small but growing user base and I’ve just launched a new feature — basic one-click security audits for monitored hosts.

It’s not trying to replace full observability stacks — it’s more about giving solo devs, sysadmins, and small teams a simpler way to keep infrastructure under control without building a huge setup.

Happy to answer questions or hear what you’d want in a tool like this — still iterating daily.

Cheers! Gregory
by abdullahkhalids | 2025-05-21 20:59:21+00:00
I used to work on a T440s on Debian from 2013 - 2017. I am surprised that your battery life is so poor on Ubuntu. I was able to frequently push my 9-cell battery laptop to 12 hours with careful usage.

If I forgot my charging cable at home, I could do a full day at the office with music and internet on battery.
by vegadw | 2025-05-21 20:59:33+00:00
The minecraft thing is a problem regardless of launcher, to the point that I actively condone people pay for the game then find ways to not require online auth.

Some moron at Microsoft decided that if your password is serving its purpose and people aren't able to get in but that there are a bunch of attempts that you should need to reset your password. Because of this, I have to reset my password. Every. Time. I. Want. To. Play.

But that means multiple 2FA codes to both my non-mirosoft account email and to my phone. All in all, it usually takes about 7 or 8 minutes each time I want to play, which is an ABSURD amount of friction for an account I don't want to be using to play the game anyway, given when I bought it it was a Mojang account without all the associated, creepy TOS changes.

Don't be afraid to look around for ways to play without a legitimate account if you've paid. If that's the better experience, it is what it is.
by yencabulator | 2025-05-21 20:59:37+00:00
Oh heh yes it is. I just remembered the original discussion from 2019 (https://github.com/golang/go/issues/33803) and grepped the source tree for cgroup to see if that got done or not, but didn't check when it got done.

As said in 2019, import https://github.com/uber-go/automaxprocs to get the functionality ASAP.
by tgma | 2025-05-21 21:00:38+00:00
I don't interpret that paragraph as non-dilutive. It's to say that the parent is just a regular shareholder currently holding the majority and then weasels away with "more resources as valuation growth" which is true in absolute mark-to-market sense, not relative ownership, but I don't think they have free cash to pony up and exercise any first right of refusal even if they have something like that on a pro-forma basis, so unless the non-profit board is adamant on voting against all capital raises and stock-based acquisitions and employee stock (they won't), their ownership share will be diluted.
by godelski | 2025-05-21 21:02:11+00:00
I don't know how you say "not technical" and "reproducible builds" in the same breath.

Look, I'm mostly with you. My point is that the issues we argue over are only things us nerds care about. Not the average person.

> you trust the USA army to not ask any control in exchange for that money?

Warrants suspicion, for sure. I stated so.

From what I know, the money was not through the military. It was through Radio Free Asia, an organization suspected to have ties to the CIA. Notably, the CIA is concerned with foreign targets, not at home. So like I argued, it is entirely reasonable for "the government" to want perfectly encrypted communication systems in the hands of people they want overthrowing a current regime while also not wanting that service to be used at home.

The government isn't a single super intelligent entity working together. It is a fucking shit show of organizations (and sub-organizations) with entirely opposing goals.

They're a non-profit... their books are open. If you are really concerned, switch to Molly. Or idk, use iMessage, WhatsApp, or Telegram. Because those have far less suspicion, right? Sure, you could use Matrix, but I can't get my grandma to use Matrix, but I can Signal. I'll take what I can get.
by hn_acc1 | 2025-05-21 21:03:29+00:00
I mean, on the one hand, sure, but on the other hand - the "anointed one" himself, DJT, is pushing AI, so I'm sure it will be fine. Unlike that heathen Joe Biden who attends more church services in a month than DJT in a year. And as I eventually learned (grew up similar to yourself, but german pentecostal in canada, also exvangelical now), if they are against helping people and against welfare/basic human rights/basic income/equality, they're truly christians in the eyes of those telegelicals. I guess somehow the "you will always have the poor among you, me you will not always have" quote from Jesus means that to be "a biblical nation", we have to ensure there are always poor people..
by joshka | 2025-05-21 21:03:30+00:00
> I agree with most of these, but I'm iffy on this one. "No one tracks a score with their friends" is not really true, it makes people feel good to see encouragement and feedback from their friends. There's no reason that encouragement has to be restricted to text comments and messages. Without feedback, you're essentially just screaming into the void knowing someone could be listening.

Good :D Let's revalue meaningful nuanced interactions over meaningless single bit signals. Even an emoji response rather than a like makes for better connection.
by bunderbunder | 2025-05-21 21:03:39+00:00
You could write DSLs for them, but you could just as easily do it within the existing syntax. Which is exactly how all the popular lisp implementations of OO, concurrency and type checking work in practice.

Many of them do use macros. But that's not about creating a special language; that's about moving expensive computations and checks that can be done statically to compile time where they belong.
by logicchains | 2025-05-21 21:05:31+00:00
Does this result imply that if we had a LLM trained on a very large volume of only English data, and one trained only on a very large volume of data in another language, your technique could be used to translate between the two languages? Pretty cool. If we somehow came across a huge volume of text in an alien language, your technique could potentially translate their language into ours (although maybe the same could be achieved just by training a single LLM on both languages?).
by Animats | 2025-05-21 21:06:14+00:00
It's an OK, but not great article.

It doesn't discuss some of the biggest bubbles, those in housing. The US, Japan, and China have all had housing and land price bubbles. They unwound in different ways. In the US it was primarily a credit bubble. Japan had a huge real estate bubble, and it collapsed so hard that the Nikkei index didn't recover for decades.

China's bubble resulted in large numbers of half-finished buildings. That's because China allows selling yet-to-be-built mortgaged apartments to consumers. In the US, you have to get construction financing at a higher rate, and can only get a mortgage on a completed structure. Banks that do construction financing pay out as work progresses, not all up front.

Fracking isn't a bubble. Fracking is a cost reduction technology in an existing market. No need to create a market.

Railways had the "railway mania" period, but track was laid and trains were run. More like a growth spurt than a bubble.
by shubkukreti | 2025-05-21 21:06:59+00:00
We got tired of spinning up one-off GPT workflows for every task — so we built a platform where anyone can post a job (e.g. "scrape competitor pricing", "write SEO-optimized blog posts", "generate leads"), and a team of AI agents handles it end-to-end.

Agents are created by developers who list them on the platform (think AI freelancers). Devs can monetize their agents as they’re used — no need to build a full product. Users just describe the job, select agents, and pay per task/job.

We're launching with:

Agent marketplace (searchable by skill/job type)

Job orchestration layer (multi-agent collaboration per task)

Simple payment flow (pay on job completion)

Dev dashboard to track agent performance & revenue
by EdgeExplorer | 2025-05-21 21:07:01+00:00
What do I say to my cousin that I see a few times a year but would like to maintain a connection with? Do I just randomly send them pictures of my food and posts about what I've been up to? Do I send an occasional random banality like "how's the weather"? Neither of these seem like good strategies.

But if I could see the occasional (low frequency) update on things in their life or interesting to them... I could maybe see an opportunity to reach out for a real conversation about something of mutual interest.

Imagine you're suddenly teleported to a party with a hundred people you know and like but aren't super close to. How do you join a conversation? I mean, if it was people you were really close to, you'd just go up and talk to someone. That's group chat / SMS. But if it's more aquaintence level... one of two things probably happens: You overhear something that you're interested in and connect on that, or you randomly drop in various conversations at a surface level until something clicks.

That's what I'm after. Conversation that naturally flows from a spark. You don't need that with your closest friends, but you don't need a social network to keep up with your closest friends either. I imagine social networking as the tool to provide ongoing sparks for real direct interactive conversations on an occasional but ongoing basis with people you aren't close enough to to just call/text.
by gavmor | 2025-05-21 21:07:04+00:00
The primes are some of the worst offenders, eg the transition from 647 (prime) to 648 (3×3×3×3×2×2×2), but as we approach infinity, the visualizations increasingly appear circular, and it's the least-primey (?) that break from the trend.

eg 854-856, & 857 (prime) are all virtually or perfectly circular. Or maybe I'm observing not mathematical but neuro-visual principles.
by afavour | 2025-05-21 21:08:05+00:00
> It's more akin to stockolm syndrom to not improve on the statu quo at this point.

Describing something very popular as “Stockholm syndrome” because you don’t like it isn’t logical at all.

And it’s easy to say that but I think it's incumbent on you to propose something better if you do.

"No, not JSX. Something better than that." ...but what?
by vessenes | 2025-05-21 21:08:05+00:00
I agree on the benefits of a hand-type craft, and that it’s an antidote to brain rot. Totally with you.

I agree with the idea of “Amistics” (thanks Neal) - a sort of societal and moral lens to view technologies through and evaluate them. Totally with you there too.

I agree that doomscrolling and social media are cancer-y in the extreme, to the extent that for a number of years I printed a daily personal newspaper. Srsly.

> this tech will continue to hamper the livelihoods of artists …

Nope. We’ll just redefine what an artist is. Pop quiz: did Disney employ more “artists” when each cel of a film was hand drawn and colored, or now when these modern “faux-artists, not like the real ones” have access to rendering clusters?

Or a second pop quiz, when da Vinci or Rubens ran workshops where apprentices painted “da Vincis” or “Rubens(s?)” who was the artist?

By the way, it’s right to redefine what an artist is. I’m going to get super controversial, ca 1900 and say that photographers can be artists. Now I’m going to get super controversial ca 1910 and say that someone mounting a bicycle wheel as a ‘readymade’ and displaying it can be an artist. Wait, now I’m going to move ahead the 1980s and say a cow cut in half and suspended in some sort of formaldehyde can be art. Hang on. A poem on a disk that deletes itself as its read is art.

The art is the creative endeavor itself. It’s the outcome of a creative person engaging with whatever tools they want to create some output. If someone wants to engage with an LLM or diffusion model or whatever and have it make something to those standards, it’s art. Calling them ‘not an artist’ based on their choice of tools is just totally incorrect.

I’m not saying all uses of diffusion models or any other AI assisted imagery is art. But I am saying that ingesting and summarizing publicized images is not theft, and people choosing to use those tools to instantiate a creative vision can absolutely be art, and further that generally the cheaper a form of creative expression becomes the better on balance for the world.
by vacuity | 2025-05-21 21:08:24+00:00
You're going from a conventional understanding of "power", along the lines of how it is discussed in politics. I'm suggesting an alternative understanding. Power can mean the enabler of an action. Power can mean the quality of being able. Power is neither good nor bad; but power can stand in relation to a context that is good or bad. Power is associated with mostly anything that has meaning: a weapon, a sentence, a conviction, an innate ability, a fortune, a name. Why can police beat down nonviolent protestors? Because the police are powerful. Why can an idea become a movement? Because the idea, and the people who participate, are powerful. Choice is powerful; to have choices and to make choices involves power. A drop of water has the power to fall, gravity has the power to make it fall, and I have the power to reach out and catch the drop. There's power in anything, if you want there to be. Isn't the fact that one is drawn to ascribe power to a concept indicative of the power of the concept? But I think "potential" is sufficient as a definition.
by kloud | 2025-05-21 21:09:58+00:00
Great work, very cool trick using the clang commands output to get the data.

In my experiments with software visualization I found that generic graph tools like Graphviz or Gephi do not produce useful visualizations for anything beyond trivial size projects. In systems there is always a hierarchical aspect, so hierarchical graphs seem to be clearer as in comparison [0].

Unfortunately, I am not aware of a good open source hierarchical graph tool. Only one seems to be a proprietary Visual Studio DGML renderer. However, this Chrome graph with 140k nodes would also be too much, VS chokes around 25k nodes+links.

[0] https://github.com/dundalek/stratify?tab=readme-ov-file#extr...
by weeb | 2025-05-21 21:10:07+00:00
Thanks, that's it. I really like 'gradually walk the UI tree', though I'm struggling a bit with the thing I want being obscured by the label (and me not remembering what was there). An offset would be nice, though I'm sure it's not easy to define a heuristic that works in all places.

The first thing I tried was in my browser, I asked for all the buttons and it labelled the 'x' to close each tab, but where the labels were laid out it just looked like an inviting right-aligned label on the clickable tabs themselves. Lost a few tabs before I realised, because you also don't see any feedback on the click since any UI feedback is hidden by the label. Hmm. Food for thought.
by wahern | 2025-05-21 21:10:34+00:00
OpenBSD added strtonum to <stdlib.h>. It's quite opinionated, but fits the usage patterns OpenBSD developers prefer.

> 50 lines long, of which most is error handling

That's a little exaggerated considering the example is an entire C program, including main. It's more like 14 lines, ignoring the '\0' check (which isn't necessary if you don't want to parse additional items), and even that includes whitespace and stderr logging.

I agree the biggest headache is reliance on errno and the nuanced--albeit conventional, consistent[1], and documented--semantics of only setting errno on error. Some POSIX APIs, at least those defined from scratch (e.g. pthreads, as opposed to incorporated common extensions) prefer returning the error code directly as you recommend. But this would technically only save you a single line, though it might save alot of confusion about semantics.

However, in this case I might keep returning the value directly and take an error pointer, similar to OpenBSD's strtonum. Otherwise you would need separate routines for char, short, int, long, and long long. Though there's still the issue of unsigned integers, and using _Generic it might be possible to at least hide all the type-specific variants behind a single interface.

And there's still the issue of needing to check for trailing garbage, or dropping the ability to use the interface inline with other parsing code. There's alot of dimensions to the problem. Parsing integers may be conceptually simple[2], but designing an interface that's easy to integrate into applications across a variety of contexts is much less simple.

[1] Consistent across libc interfaces, excepting those that may invoke syscalls internally, like printf, where errno may be incidentally modified even on success.

[2] I personally often prefer to just write a simple loop to manually parse integers. It's sometimes easier to integrate the desired error checking inline, or even elide it altogether (garbage-in, garbage-out).
by rpgbr | 2025-05-21 21:10:42+00:00
I've been using 8 GB of RAM MacBook since 2015, and by then this “8 GB isn't enough” chorus was strong. Nowadays I use a M1 Air, 8 GB of RAM, zero complains, really.

For most people that just browse the web, write some stuff and do their email, 8 GB is still enough.