MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by jmyeet | 2025-05-12 20:29:30+00:00
Not a single one of the ~700 nuclear power plants has been built without significant government subsidies [1][2].

Additionally, the industry as a whole is shielded from the liability that would otherwise have bankrupted it multiple times. Notably, the clean up from Fukushima will likely take over 100 years, requires tech not yet invented and will likely cost as much as a trillion dollars [3]. In the US, there is a self-insurance fund paid into by the industry, which would've been exhausted 10-20 times over from a Fukushima level disaster. Plus, Congress severely limits liability from nuclear accidents, both on a per-plant and total basis ie the Price-Anderson Act [4].

Next, it seems like it's the taxpayer who is paying to process and store spent nuclear waste, a problem that will persist for centuries.

Even with all this the levellized-cost-of-energy ("LCOE") of fission power is incredibly expensive and seemingly going up [5].

Some want to reduce costs by using more off-the-shelf tech and replicating it for scale, most notably with small modular reactors ("SMRs") but this actually makes no sense because larger fission reactors are simply more efficient.

[1]: https://theecologist.org/2016/jan/04/after-60-years-nuclear-...

[2]: https://www.ucs.org/resources/nuclear-power-still-not-viable...

[3]: https://cleantechnica.com/2019/04/16/fukushimas-final-costs-...

[4]: https://www.yuccamountain.org/price_anderson.htm

[5]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source
by DangitBobby | 2025-05-12 20:30:32+00:00
> but it has nearly cosmetic effect if you're hit by a car.

I highly, highly doubt that. Your skull is much more likely to hit the pavement in a car accident, and a helmet can turn that from instead death to a concussion or TBI. People, PLEASE just wear a helmet. All it takes is falling one time to realize how good it is to have one.
by IshKebab | 2025-05-12 20:30:54+00:00
Yeah.... I mean I get where you're coming from because how often do you have to look at disassembly to debug a C bug? Very rarely.

But that's because the tools debug at the C level. That isn't the case for SV at all - all the tools operate at the SV level.

Unless you're going to create commercial grade simulators, debuggers, synthesis tools etc. then users are going to be debugging SV.

My day job is debugging generated SV and even though it isn't nearly as bad as the code smallpipe posted it still suuucks. It costs me a lot of time reverse engineering it.

If anything is going to replace SV (and I really hope it does) it really really needs to focus on producing clean debuggable output. That includes things like using interfaces, structs and so on.
by LadyCailin | 2025-05-12 20:30:58+00:00
This is exactly why I think software engineering should require a licensing requirement, much like civil engineering. I get that people will complain about that destroying all sorts of things, and it might, yes, but fight me. Crap like this is exactly why it should be a requirement, and why you won’t convince me that the idea is not in general a good one.
by pinkmuffinere | 2025-05-12 20:30:59+00:00
It is a very common gripe that items have decreased in quality compared to some 'golden era' in the past. You've likely heard somebody say "They don't make 'em like they used to!" I think the parent comment is saying it's interesting to hear a technician say quality has _increased_, because the opposite complaint is so stereotypically common.
by burnt-resistor | 2025-05-12 20:31:11+00:00
Spoiler alert ;)

I thought the video would take a predictable route that perhaps the owner was just a garden-variety, small business, self-limiting jerk. Then, my jaw fell onto the floor and fragmented into a billion 01005 resistors.

It seems absolutely crazy that they managed to be caught and avoid significant penalties of prosecution. WTH!
by JumpCrisscross | 2025-05-12 20:31:36+00:00
> How?

This is highly situation dependent.

If you’re blowing the whistle on the British special forces, you’d want to have copious contemporaneous notes referencing where official documents may corroborate your claims.

You’d also want to introduce your claims into the Parliamentary record; first step would be finding an MP who wants to reform (not unmake) the special forces. In this way you can play into ambitious underlings’ promotion dreams while dangling transformation resources for the agency you’re criticising.

> How do you get them?

If you can’t manage the basics of politics, don’t launch a political endeavour. (This is true for whistleblowing and entrepreneurship, commercial and political.)

> If only Snowden would have talked to a lawyer, I'm sure he'd be safe in the US right now

Chelsea Manning is out of jail. And Manning went about her business in about the stupidest way possible.
by programmertote | 2025-05-12 20:31:39+00:00
I have no doubt that a lot of garden-variety diagnoses and treatments can be done by an AI system that is fine-tuned and vetted to accomplish the task. I recently had to pay $93 to have a virtual session with a physician to get prescription for a cough syrup, which I already knew what to take before talking to her because I did some research/reading. Some may argue, "Doctors studied years in med school and you shouldn't trust Google more than them", but knowing human's fallibility and knowing that a lot of doctors do look things up on places like https://www.wolterskluwer.com/en/solutions/uptodate to refresh/reaffirm their knowledge, I'd argue that if we are willing to take the risk, why shouldn't we be allowed to take that risk on our own? Why do I have to pay $93 (on top of the cough syrup that costed ~$44) just so that the doctor can see me on Zoom for less than 5 mins and submit an order for the med?

With the healthcare prices increasing at the breakneck speed, I am sure AI will take more and more role in diagnosing and treating people's common illnesses, and hopefully (doubt it), the some of that savings will be transferred to the patients.

P.S. In contrast to the US system, in my home city (Rangoon, Burma/Myanmar), I have multiple clinics near my home and a couple of pharmacy within two bus stops distance. I can either go buy most of the medications I need from the pharmacy (without prescription) and take them on my own (why am I not allowed to take that risk?) OR I can go see a doctor at one of these clinics to confirm my diagnosis, pay him/her $10-$20 for the visit, and then head down to the pharmacy to buy the medication. Of course, some of the medications that include opioids will only be sold to me with the doctor's prescription, but a good number of other meds are available as long as I can afford them.
by zdragnar | 2025-05-12 20:31:58+00:00
Setting aside all of the other info that was leaked, knowing that the only profiles you see are actual, real people would be nice.

Way back when I last used a dating site, a significant percentage of profiles ended up being placeholders for scams of some sort.

In fact, several texted me a link to some bogus "identity verification" site under the guise of "I get too many fake bot profile hits"... Read the fine print, and you're actually signing up for hundreds of dollars worth of pron subscriptions.

If the dating app itself verified people were real, AND took reports of spam seriously, AND kept that information in a way that wasn't insecure, it'd be worth it.
by Artoooooor | 2025-05-12 20:32:27+00:00
I'm still baffled by difference between Audacity on Windows and Linux. On Windows I have n+1 recording devices, where n is number of microphones, the 1 being stereo mix. On Linux I have gazillion cryptic names and I pray for each of them to even work. And neither of them is stereo mix, for such advanced feature I have to enable external mixer.
by catigula | 2025-05-12 20:33:27+00:00
I just want to outline my overarching concern off the bat with similar sentiments I see expressed exactly in this vein by people: there's a very strong potential for serious cognitive biases, and, frankly, simple flawed logic, to be operant in the statement, "I do not need emergency assistance because I am skilled driver".

The fallacy is that simply because a low-probability event hasn't happened to you, doesn't mean that you wouldn't benefit from assistance if it did. It seems to be a combination of optimism bias/competence bias/dunning-kruger. Systems that can mitigate "human error" are extremely critical and desirable, even by highly skilled/talented/trained machine operators like airline pilots.

Anyhow, it feels like your specific critiques apply to proactive systems, which actually don't really fall under the umbrella of what I'm outlining per se.

Proactive systems are either very intentionally engaged (i.e. lane centering or adaptive cruise) or highly theoretical and not widely implemented, for example, proactive driver assist in TSS3, if enabled (which it isn't fresh out of the factory for reasons you likely outline here), makes subtle corrections to the driver's experience, e.g. engaging brakes when cars ahead slow down or on curves. I have strong hopes for technology like this as being a good bridge between the challenges of full driver assistance and current technology, which, at the cutting edge, is undoubtedly impressive. They may very well not be there yet, which is suggested by Toyota's reluctance to make this the default experience on their equipped vehicles.

Conversely, reactive systems like AEB are widely tested by regulators and, for example, the IIHS, and should only ever genuinely engage in emergency situations. Certain systems do this better than others, which is software/sensor based. Some do exceptionally. Some do not.

Quick note:

(~2024 RAV4): Uses TSS2.5, not TSS3. There appears to be a large difference here in competence. I haven't driven with either system extensively.
by wduquette | 2025-05-12 20:33:31+00:00
The thing that fatigues me with the Oblivion remaster are the constant loading screens. Go from the first floor to the second floor of a house? Loading screen! Some are faster than others, but they all break the flow.

But IIRC this was a problem with the original too, not something I can blame on Unreal 5. :-)
by KaiserPro | 2025-05-12 20:34:48+00:00
I mean kinda.

But a _lot_ of council estates were well designed, but suffered from failed assumptions. The underground parking in the barbican for example was the same design that cause so many issues for estates elsewhere. They were hidden and that meant crime, unless there was tight access control.

https://modernistpilgrimage.com/2015/10/18/trellick-tower-lo... The trellick tower is fucking ugly on the outside, just like the barbican, but even the trellick has some smashing design features. Like most estates at the time, the three bed flats had an upstairs. Not only that, they were bright! Had a balcony.

The difference between the trellick and the barbican is the barbican had middle class people growing plants on the balcony. Until the hipsters moved in, the trellick just had shit.

https://municipaldreams.wordpress.com/ has some brilliant insight into council housing, the history, the plans and lots and lots of pictures.

I think the biggest thing to take away is that for a long while council housing _had_ to be better than private. It was partly slum clearance, partly vote winning, partly "you fought for this in the war" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parker_Morris_Committee has the general plan.

Separate kitchens, storage, decent square footage, working heating as a _minimum_ something which even 500k flats struggle to do now.
by sedatk | 2025-05-12 20:34:49+00:00
Picking 1997 as a start date is interesting because that's when ISP's had started serving Internet access to general public in Turkey. The state had subsidized this by waiving phone-call costs when dialing an ISP. That had caused sudden increase in Internet's popularity. I remember staying online until morning chatting on IRC, downloading stuff, browsing the web, playing MUD. Great times.
by wahern | 2025-05-12 20:34:56+00:00
I've done this for awhile now, but only a couple years ago learned about the traditional practice of Common Placing, of which this is arguably a modern version: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commonplace_book

Also, whenever I add a reference I'll include a link to the Wayback Machine in addition to a direct link, and especially for PDFs mirror it locally--both Wayback Machine and Google Books have taught me invaluable lessons about relying on third-parties to maintain access to important sources.

I maintain the page using Markdown, and use Markdeep[1] for client-side rendering. Though overtime I've added some features, e.g. to make anchor linking easier.

To prevent myself from adding too much junk, my rule is I'll only add a source if I return to it at least twice, with a significant gap in between visits. That is, it has to be sufficiently memorable and substantive. And the effort required to relocate the source is part of the measure of its worthiness. My notes tend to be more terse than the article's examples, but sometimes they're a good place to link to related material that might not make the cut for a separate entry. Early on I added a separate "Inbox" section to allow myself greater liberty in adding sources, but that didn't work well. Half of the stuff there should have just been added to the main section, and the other half left off. Better to just try to keep disciplined, though there are always the exceptions you can't resist.

Since starting around 2017 I've accumulated about 230 entries.

[1] https://casual-effects.com/markdeep/
by tantalor | 2025-05-12 20:34:56+00:00
I was a bit puzzled what "1663" is. Here's what I found:

> The Lab's science and technology digital magazine presents the most significant research initiatives and accomplishments from national-security-related programs as well as projects that advance the frontiers of basic science. Our name is an homage to the Lab's historic role in the nation's service: During World War II, all that the outside world knew of the top-secret laboratory was the mailing address - P.O. Box 1663, Santa Fe, New Mexico.

https://researchlibrary.lanl.gov/about-the-library/publicati...
by hnfong | 2025-05-12 20:35:00+00:00
50 years? Nah

Like, these things seem obvious in hindsight even now.

You already have the whole Internet of data. You already have GPUs. All you need to do is just use the GPUs to feed the scraped (and maybe not-so-legally downloaded) data into some artificial neural network and you'll get a rather intelligent AI! How could one possibly think otherwise?
by pinkmuffinere | 2025-05-12 20:35:16+00:00
This is such a shame to hear. I buy almost all my large electronics used (laptop / cellphone), used vehicles are often a steal, I love used clothes, recently looked into buying a used suit (but I found a comparable quality new suit for less), I'll even by mattresses/bedding/furniture used if it's coming from a friend (so I can confirm I won't get bed bugs). I don't know what my point is here, I guess just that used stuff is soooooo good for the price.
by Workaccount2 | 2025-05-12 20:35:33+00:00
That is about within a factor of 1000 of the number of atoms in the universe. So divide the universe into 1000 compartments of equal atom count, and there is about 1 year left for each atom in there.

To put this in perspective, a drop of water is about 1 trillion groups of 100 billion atoms (or 100 sextillion atoms).

So, we got some time left.
by winwang | 2025-05-12 20:36:09+00:00
Good question -- it depends. For certain workloads, it might look exactly the same! For others, I found that the memory and VM constraints were creating large inefficiencies. Also, many teams simply don't want to manage that level of data infra: managing EMR, instance type optimization, spark optimization (now with GPU configs!), custom images, upgrades, etc.

We take care of that and make it as easy as pie... or so we hope! On top of that, we also deploy an external shuffle service, and deal with other plugins, connectors, etc.

I suppose it's similar to using Databricks Serverless SQL!

Another thing: we ran into an incompatible (i.e. non-accelerated) operation in one of our first real workloads, so we worked with our customer to speed up that workload even more with a small query optimization.
Show HN: Authenticate TikTok Users Without Login Kit (Via Profile Bio)
by DavCreator | 2025-05-12 20:36:10+00:00
The official way to authenticate TikTok users in your app is through TikTok’s Login Kit [1]. But integrating it requires passing a manual review [2] - and many apps get rejected if they don’t meet TikTok’s criteria.

I recently discovered a simple alternative: you can verify ownership of a TikTok account without any official API.

---How it works---

TikTok publicly exposes basic profile data through their website. For example:

curl https://www.tiktok.com/@example (@example can be the username of any public TikTok profile)

This fetches the profile page (HTML), which includes up-to-date bio information. There no rate limits (even from VPNs or AWS IP range), and profile bio updates are reflected within < 30 seconds.

This makes it possible to verify that a user controls a given TikTok account by:

1. Generating a unique code e.g., a 4-emoji sequence from e.g. 100 different emojis (allowing over 100m combinations).

2. Asking the user to add this sequence to their TikTok bio.

3. Fetching their bio to check for the sequence => if included in bio => user is owner of the account.

---Proof of Concept: CrushTok---

To show this in action, I built CrushTok - a „dating app“ based on TikTok profiles.

(Pitch: CrushTok lets you create fun surveys for your TikTok Story, where your followers can secretly share if they have a crush on you. If two people admit a mutual crush, they’ll see a match!)

If you got TikTok installed on your mobile you can try CrushTok and the „bio verification“ out with the link in the bio here: https://www.tiktok.com/@crushtok90

[1] https://developers.tiktok.com/doc/login-kit-web/ [2] https://developers.tiktok.com/doc/getting-started-create-an-...
by BeetleB | 2025-05-12 20:36:14+00:00
I can't speak to the OP's condition, but having seen plenty of doctors and physical therapists in the US for over a decade:

Yes, they propose exercises.

No, they don't work.

For certain (common) conditions, PT seems to have it nailed - the exercises really help. For the others, it's just snake oil. Not backed by much research. The current state of the art is just not good when it comes to chronic pain.

So while I don't know if an LLM can be better than a battery of human experts, I do know that those human experts do not perform well. I'm guessing with the OP's case, that battery of human experts does not lead to a consensus - you just end up with 10 different treatments/diagnoses (and occasionally, one is a lot more common than the other, but it's still wrong).
by brendoelfrendo | 2025-05-12 20:36:58+00:00
I suppose it depends; if you're trying to showcase the work, then for sure, I'm more interested in what you made than the fact that you made it. Hopefully the work speaks for itself. But while "I made a foo" is not particularly enticing, "I made a foo and here's what I learned about bar in the process" can be a good thing. In that case, the shift in framing works because the focus is less on the product and more about sharing knowledge that the creator gained along the way that they hope might be entertaining or valuable to someone else.
by tacon | 2025-05-12 20:37:15+00:00
>Because without any form of regulation, the ISP has no requirement to honor that letter?

Is this your personal exerience, or are you making assumptions?

I would love to hear how this process possibly fails to unsubscribe anyone:

1. Go to your state's corporate website and get/buy the name and address of the corporate registered agent for your ISP or whatever. In Texas that costs $1.

2. Write or ask ChatGPT to write a demand letter that they cancel your service as of the date of your letter. If they don't, threaten to sue them in small claims court. In Texas, threaten triple damages under the Deceptive Trade Practices Act. (ChatGPT will help you write demands using the "laundry list" of deceptive acts.)

3. Send letter return receipt requested.

4. A lawyer on their side is now involved. They will never ever show up in any small claims court for this. And if they do, the judge is so on your side for this!

Heck, this works for a bunch of things, once you assert your rights. For example, I made a Coinbase account when they first existed and played with $10 of bitcoin. There it sat for six years or so, and then I tried to log in again. Their identity bullshit was demanding to use a phone number from an older phone and they stonewalled. So I sent a demand letter as above and, surprise!, my account was magically re-enabled for my $3 of bitcoin.
by jjulius | 2025-05-12 20:37:19+00:00
This is why the whole discussion around reintroducing them into the North Cascades in Washington has fascinated me (I take no sides, though as a backpacker in that area, I'd kinda prefer not to have to deal with them - black bears trend afraid of us, I've never minded spotting them!). British Columbia has them, and the border doesn't prevent them from making their way down here. I've yet to understand why that is the case - what keeps them from actually coming into the Washington Cascades and making themselves at home?
by amrocha | 2025-05-12 20:37:22+00:00
Ah, so close.

Old people aren’t bad drivers because of “driving skills”. They’re bad drivers because driving is incredibly dangerous and they’re old.

What we need to do to prevent this is eliminate driving as a lifestyle. Treat it as the dangerous act that it truly is. We don’t let 75 year olds operate heavy machinery, we shouldn’t let them operate cars either.
by evantbyrne | 2025-05-12 20:37:38+00:00
Been there. Nagged the city of Seattle for nearly two years about fixing their insecure digital wallets, and in return they just acted weird to me and never really fixed the problem. Wouldn't tell me anything not even the vendor so I could communicate to them that this issue could exist elsewhere. The goal of these tactics is to delay long enough that you give up on publishing. So publish. Just be ethical and stay within the bounds of the law on what you access and release.
by mjamil | 2025-05-12 20:38:18+00:00
It is utterly weird to me that so many commenters here appreciate the Barbican's aesthetics. To me, it is an ugly eyesore that's a legacy of the brutalist wave of the mid-20th century. I lived close to it (in Islington) for many months, and avoided walking through it to get to the City (where I worked).
by Lerc | 2025-05-12 20:38:34+00:00
Absolutely, I have seen so many good ideas that have not yet made it into notable trained models.

A lot of that is because you need to have a lot more faith than "seems like a good idea" before you spend a few million in training that depends upon it.

Some of it is because when the models released now began training, a lot of those ideas hasn't been published yet.

Time will resolve most of that, cheaper and more performant hardware will allow a lot of those ideas to be tested without the massive commitment required to build the leading edge models.