MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by carlosjobim | 2025-05-26 15:17:23+00:00
> That's been done for a long time and you can still get around it if the margin is good enough. You just have to either want to go to the event yourself or be willing to one ticket out of the maximum you can purchase as the cost of doing business.

You tie each ticket to the name of that specific attendee. The ticket buyer doesn't even have to get a ticket for himself. This is bullet proof, unless scalpers can convince their customers to make a fake ID to attend.

> not everyone actually knows who they're going to invite for sure at time of purchase

Then wait with your purchase until you have figured it out.
by nyarlathotep_ | 2025-05-26 15:17:50+00:00
> graveyard is full of irreplaceable people

I am not special and make no claims of it; I am entirely replaceable and I'd make no claims to the contrary.

This has nothing to do with me or anyone like me, and everything to do with the "adult daycare" style of project managers.

I'm tired of re-iterating to non-technical project managers that status of tickets, why things are "blocked" or why the ask isn't feasible given constraints, over and over again. Time is a flat-circle.

If they understood the problem scope better, such questions would not arise. I know this from experience.

The majority of them are completely stateless and I'll repeat things daily for weeks on end, explaining the same things over and over again, while they make 0 effort to "unblock" issues.

I've had one good project manager in my career that advocated for his technical staff and understood the both the project and business deeply; he was invaluable and a pleasure to work with.

I've had many many others that served no tangible purpose whatsoever.

My frustration is ostensibly there is a purpose for these jobs beyond employing people with the role of "attending meetings"; I've rarely seen it.
by lttree | 2025-05-26 15:18:21+00:00
I'm losing track of friends across 7 messaging apps, locations, and time-zones. I've moved across 9 countries, 14 cities, and have been finding it difficult to remember to check in (ADHD+founder life).

Facebook pokes are dead so -- BetterFriend! At work, we've got a CRM for clients, to remind ourselves to message people.

Friends, best friends, and family have different cadences that this will generate tickets to remind you to message them. Feel free to use BetterFriend as a free tool. I'll continue to host this just for myself regardless.

Data will never be shared or used.
by salomon812 | 2025-05-26 15:18:36+00:00
I wish they hadn't used "physics-defying" in their press release because I'm certain this is an important discovery for water condensers, but claiming it doesn't need an external energy source is massively negligent.

I'm fairly certain they've created some form of a Brownian Ratchet: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brownian_ratchet

People love to claim there's no external energy source, but then when you look closely, you'll find a hot-cold differential, and then you need external energy to maintain that differential. I'd put a large sum of money that either the material is colder than the ambient environment or the incoming moisture is warmer than the ambient environment. It might even be a differential within their material, and the lab lights are warming one side! There's a lot of passive devices that rely on the hot-cold cycle of day and night, that still counts as energy input from the sun.

The article even mentions they tried to rule out a thermal gradient by increasing the thickness of the material, I'm not sure I understand why that would rule it out... the gradient would still exist.

I hate this, because if they aren't intentionally supplying energy, it's probably really efficient (assuming they aren't taking samples out of the freezer or something) so it's still a big deal and important but apparently we have to claim something is a perpetual motion machine to get attention among the public.
by harrall | 2025-05-26 15:19:11+00:00
I find Junie (from JetBrains / IntelliJ) great compared to other offerings. I have 10+ years experience as well.

It writes JUnit tests with mocks, chooses to run them, and fixes the test or sometimes my (actually broken) code.

It’s not helpful for 90% of my work, but like having a hammer, it’s good to have when you know that you have a nail.
by StopDisinfo910 | 2025-05-26 15:19:45+00:00
Do you have any argument to share outside of insulting me and Piketty?

Charitably, you seem to be implying that any actions which would disturb the current situation would be detrimental because current allocation is the best that can be done.

That seems highly suspicious to me because I don't think anyone is happy with the current fiscal policies. People disagree about what should be done but I think everyone agrees we are not at an optimum.
by Yizahi | 2025-05-26 15:20:14+00:00
Yeah, great innovation. Also allows for many amazing and useful features for us people, such as allowing these tokens to expire and disappear from your account, or programming specific tokens to be only transferable to specific accounts or for specific goods, or for example controlling all token accounts in every single country on earth from the central location. E.g. for example Trump (assuming a USA stabletoken) not only sends you to the Salvador death camp, but also blocks and confiscated all your tokens and blocks you from ever having a token account in the future, all with a single click from NY central bank. Or replace the same with any other country and central bank.

Amazing utopia awaits for us, can't wait to take part in that hell economy :)
by ninkendo | 2025-05-26 15:20:38+00:00
Not only that, but the strength of bash is its ubiquity. (Or for that matter, posix sh, if you want even more ubiquity.) If we started adding lots of features to bash, it wouldn’t make sense to use them unless you are positive every place using your script has a new-enough version installed. Which defeats the purpose of the main use case for bash in the first place, which is (IMO) for portable scripts that will run on any Unix-like system.
by daveguy | 2025-05-26 15:20:52+00:00
> I just rewrote 300ish advanced PostgreSQL queries to mysql queries.

Translation from one set of tokens to another is exactly the primary use case of LLMs. This is exactly what it should be good at. Developing new queries, much less so. Translation from one set of database queries to another was already very well defined and well covered before LLMs came about.
by wtallis | 2025-05-26 15:21:17+00:00
Yes, only the 32-bit target, and only the gnu toolchain. Compiling on Windows using the Microsoft toolchain to target 32-bit Windows will still be on the Tier 1 list: https://doc.rust-lang.org/rustc/platform-support.html

Interestingly, Windows on ARM hasn't made it up to Tier 1 yet.
by igor47 | 2025-05-26 15:21:17+00:00
> For example, using an LLM to help you write a Dockerfile when you write Dockerfiles once a project and don't have a dedicated expert like a Deployment Engineer in your company is fantastic.

This made me think of gell-mann amnesia: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gell-Mann_amnesia_effect

Basically, when you understand the problem domain, you know the llm is generating crap that, as the OP says, you're unwilling to put your name on. But when it's in a domain you don't know, you forget about how crappy the LLM is normally and go with the vibe.
by CommenterPerson | 2025-05-26 15:21:42+00:00
Some 20 years ago my kid's first grade teacher did something that motivated the kids to read a lot. Each kid had a small notebook where they would list books they read and the date. The parent had to sign off on each item on the list. When they completed 10, they would be eligible to pick a toy from a basket of dollar store junky toys she had in class. I think it was not just the toy (because they could get enough toys at home) but also the competition and recognition.
by scuff3d | 2025-05-26 15:21:55+00:00
Not even just that, full face masks aren't nearly as bad as they are made out to be. I use the Resmed AirTouch F20. Nasal masks are just too uncomfortable for me. And it's really not that big a deal, certainly not as ridiculous as the pictures I see on articles like this.

As far as the meds go, I read this as something for someone who either can't or won't use a CPAP.CPAP would still be the go to treatment, and this would just fill in the gaps.
by nickpsecurity | 2025-05-26 15:22:44+00:00
Watch the Joe Rogan interview with Trump to see what he's really like:

https://youtu.be/hBMoPUAeLnY?si=IJxxRE-RuL9FHKpE

What we normally see is a stage persona. He also speaks differently when dealing with hostiles vs people acting like he's a human being. Rogan's style brings out people's real personalities better.
by ajross | 2025-05-26 15:22:56+00:00
FWIW, I don't see how any of that rebuts the idea that VATs and tariffs are both taxes collected at the point of trade and that they can be used for basically all of the same policy purposes (which, as we all know, is not limited to revenue generation).

Yes yes yes, complex rules are complicated. So what? You can do things with a VAT that you can with a tariff, and that you can not with an income tax or estate tax or usage fee or whatever.

They are closely related policy instruments.
by tgv | 2025-05-26 15:24:12+00:00
I know that survey panels like HMAC. They pay their respondents (a bit of) money for each survey they complete. And of course there are bots for that, and the simplest strategy is to immediately call the survey panel's end point that registers a response as complete (triggering payment). That can be stopped by making the surveyor signing the link upon true completion. Just adding a key isn't going to cut it.
by constantcrying | 2025-05-26 15:24:16+00:00
What is the point?

- Banks should have controls over money that are impossible with crypto. It is absolutely vital for any state to control their own currency and the banks need methods to accomplish that.

- Why would banks need a decentralized ledger at all? It makes literally no sense to have banks maintain such a ledger. Banks do not need to solve the double spending problem and you can build a digital currency without a block chain. Not as a theoretical, but right now basically all my banking happens digitally, what is the actual technical point of introducing a block chain to that?
by jlivin | 2025-05-26 15:24:23+00:00
I'm building Codus — a privacy-focused, offline-first toolkit for developers with AI enhancements where they make sense. It includes tools like offline chat, a Markdown editor, UUID generator and a JWT decoder. LLMs are pulled and run locally via Ollama, keeping everything private and fast. I'm currently adding a database client, regex tester, text diff tool, and more. https://github.com/JamieLivingstone/codus
by emp17344 | 2025-05-26 15:25:27+00:00
No one can provide a technical definition of what it means to think. That doesn’t mean LLMs are thinking. This style of argument, which often boils down to “you can’t solidly define the thought process, therefore LLMs can think!” is a fallacy. Why would we expect LLMs to be capable of thought in the first place?

The fact that these models have devoured the contents of the entire internet and still aren’t AGI is an indication that LLMs won’t develop a capacity for cognition.
by klabb3 | 2025-05-26 15:25:49+00:00
I suspected as much. It would have been too obvious of an attack vector for something so sensitive. Then obviously my argument falls apart, since it’s no longer saves any config.

That said, you can still benefit from pub keys by having good infra and key rotations to prevent some attacks like message replay after months. Putting such a requirement on customers is pretty doomed because of the workload, processes and infra required.
by DaiPlusPlus | 2025-05-26 15:26:00+00:00
> If you want to keep building software on by now ancient hardware, they’ll still give you the tools to do it

There are other use-cases, though not exactly popular or mainstream, but supposing you need dozens, hundreds, maybe even over a thousand currently-supported Windows VMs running off a single VM host box: you'll achieve a higher VM density with an x86 build of an OS compared to the x64 build; right now the only option is some cut-down custom build of Windows 10 Embedded x86[1]

...though I'm sure no-one outside of a DEFCON or CCC meetup's drinking-game will ever find themselves doing this - just so long as I get to see it in a youtube video.

[1] EDIT: Turns out they renamed the (non-CE) NT-based Windows Embedded to "Windows IoT" - which annoys me because it's perfectly allowed to make a Windows IoT build without any networking features enabled - so it'd be like calling Apple's iPod Touch as Apple's "iPod iPhone".

----

I'll admit I'm surprised that "x32" (i.e. AMD64 ISA, but with 32-bit pointers) was never supported on Windows, nor exactly popular on Linux, because (at least before Electon Apps existed) plenty of software really has no business using 64-bit pointers, so it makes sense to keep 32-bit pointers; another benefit-of-sorts is that if your program has a memory-leak then it'll crash once the leak hits 4GB - but with 64-bit pointers your process might end-up gobbling hundreds of gigs of RAM before the next malloc call fails.

While we're at it, let's also bring back Intel's 21-bit NEAR/FAR pointers ("segmented memory") if only to keep Rust programmers (and their compiler team) on their toes.
by erikerikson | 2025-05-26 15:26:06+00:00
This seems deeply confused.

When you are making an API request, you've validated the certificate of the system you're making the request to and in the process doing so over a secure connection. You've usually authenticated yourself, also over a secure connection, and are including some sort of token validating that authentication which provides your authorization as well.

When you are accepting a call in your web hook, you need to ensure that the call came from the authenticated source which the signature provides. The web hook caller connects using the same certificate validation and secure connection infrastructure. They won't connect if your certificate doesn't validate or they can't establish a secure connection. The signature is their mechanism of authenticating with your API except that they are the authority of their identity.

That last bit is where the the contradiction falls away, the webhook implementer is retaining authentication authority and infrastructure (whether you call them or they are calling you) rather than asking the client to provide an authentication system for them to validate themselves with.

[edit: there's an additional factor. If you move authentication to the web hook implementer you lose control of what authentication mechanisms are in use. Having to implement everyone's authentication systems would be a nightmare full of contradictions. You also open yourself up to having to follow client processes, attend meetings, and otherwise not be able to automate the process of setting up a webhook.]
by rasulkireev | 2025-05-26 15:26:24+00:00
I'm still working on Marketing Agents (marketingagents.net) in my free time. Trying to make an open source, self hostable app that will allow founders scale their marketing efforts.

Thinking about future monetization efforts and found myself liking Posthog approach for that.

Host for large companies looking to automate marketing, yet leaving it free (self hostable) for smaller companies that can't pay.
by scuff3d | 2025-05-26 15:26:24+00:00
I've been using one for 4 years, and would never go back to sleeping without it.

I know it's annoying at first, took me a couple months to really get use to, but if you put in the effort to find a mask that works for you, it's 100% worth it. I dealt with bad sleep for 15 years before getting one, and I'll never go back.
by HexDecOctBin | 2025-05-26 15:26:39+00:00
Thanks for sharing the BINDING-BLOCK macro, it solves one of my perennial problems with Lispy languages (I believe I have ranted about this on HN too). The best I could come up with was something that required reimplementing defun, etc.

And thanks for the "pass" tip for Python. I gave up using Python a few months ago, and ported all my Python scripts to C and ObjC because I just couldn't handle indentation bugs after every refactor. Never realised the solution could be this simple.
by rahimnathwani | 2025-05-26 15:27:48+00:00
Case documents here: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69607483/v-the-regents-...

Most recently, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cacd.95...

The motion to dismiss does not refute or deny the alleged discrimination.

The folks behind the lawsuit include academics/authors who have been studying the prevalence and impact of racial discrimination in university admissions for many years:

https://www.amazon.com/dp/0465029965

https://www.amazon.com/dp/1457528290
by drweevil | 2025-05-26 15:27:56+00:00
Likewise on the nerding!

My first question on reading this was how it varied by format. I naively thought that the shorter the format, the more important the toss; i.e. T20 would show the biggest difference. But this data shows it is in the ODI where the toss has the greatest effect. I guess that makes sense, since the ODI--being 50 overs/Innings--maximizes the chance of differing conditions over the course of the game. One team will bowl in the morning-early afternoon, the other in the afternoon-evening. Win the toss and pick right, and you have a distinct advantage.
by N00dlesHead | 2025-05-26 15:28:02+00:00
I cant use a cpap so anything else worth trying is good for me. I have nocturnal seizures, need a sports guard to keep from biting chunks off my tongue while sleeping, plus a deviated septum. Cpap doesnt work for me theres no air flow,so Im waiting on both surgery on my nose (going on 3 years) and a mouth guard to pull my jaw forward which is taking forever as well. I havent had a decent sleep in years
by refulgentis | 2025-05-26 15:28:12+00:00
It's bad to steal things and we should try to prevent it.

(I'm generally pro-piracy and don't know the details here, but am also old enough for "the people like MONEY" to not be a particularly noteworthy quality. The things that jump out to me here are A) is Cloudflare's attempted implication that they just need a better injunction true? B) The sophomoric argument that "people will die due to this" is my "people like MONEY" smell)
by xyst | 2025-05-26 15:28:53+00:00
Knowing banks, this will take much longer than 4-5 years to architect. Then an additional 5 years to rollout.

This plan assumes the current mercurial administration stays their course on stablecoin to replace USD as reserve currency and future administrations also going along with it.

It’s a massive gamble that depends on many variables.

For now, it’s a PR move.
by glitchc | 2025-05-26 15:28:56+00:00
Demonetization is not the same thing as stablecoins. Countries are allowed to withdraw certain bank note denominations and it's been done many times in the past.

In most countries where demonetization occurs, the central bank continues to accept demonetized currency for the foreseeable future, exchanging it for valid denominations at par.

The government of India came down hard on corruption and tax evasion, more politically motivated than anything. But then people voted for it and the majority supported the process. If they didn't, the government would have been discarded in the next election.
by erikerikson | 2025-05-26 15:29:19+00:00
Because then the client would need to host token vending infrastructure just to accept a webhook request.

As designed, the webhook receiver only has to implement the one endpoint.

[edit: in addition, bearer tokens are not the only authentication system. By moving authentication onto the webhook holder, the caller now has to satisfy any authentication system and have implementations for all of them. Some authentication systems are manual and thereby introduce friction. By providing the authentication materials themselves, they reduce friction and reduce their implementation to having only one mechanism.]
by skybrian | 2025-05-26 15:29:37+00:00
The difference is that vendors have a good reason to widely distribute a public key. They are sending messages via webhooks to many customers, all of whom need to authenticate the same vendor. Publishing a public key solves this. The vendor could even bake it into open source software that customers download.

A vendor’s customers aren’t distributing software. They’re only sending messages via API calls to the vendor. This is many-to-one instead of one-to-many. The key distribution problem is solved differently: each customer saves a different API key to a file. There’s no key distribution problem that would be made easier by publishing a public key.

(That is, on the sending side. The receiving side is handled via TLS.)

It’s a web request either way, but this isn’t peer-to-peer communication, so the symmetry is broken.
by fallingfrog | 2025-05-26 15:30:23+00:00
The basic pattern of not having one object construct some other object that has external references to it is.. kind of obvious. I didn't know there was a name for it but sure, I agree, fine.

But the way DI is usually implemented is with this bag of global variables which you just reach in and grab the first object of the desired type. I call this the little jack horner pattern. Stick in your thumb and pull out a plum. That, is stupid. You've reinvented global variables, but actually worse. Congratulations.
by cies | 2025-05-26 15:31:15+00:00
I found they work for tasks that have been done 1000s of times already. But for creative solutions in super specialized environments (lot's of the works I do it just that) they cannot help me.

I expect they soon will be able to help me with basic refactoring that needs to be performed across a code base. Luckily my code uses strong types: type safety quickly shows where the LLM was tripping/forgetting.
by belter | 2025-05-26 15:31:31+00:00
Be careful about the new version of Claude.

Its very verbose, it writes a lot of code, but I just caught it, hard coding some replies to an API I was creating an introspection for. All this like in the middle of many hundreds of innocent lines of code.

Go and review every single line of code. This is a pro developer colleague that will fail you when you least expect. Frankly the time savings are minimal for professional quality code.

Some will say it was a problem with the prompt, but I would say it was mimicking the behavior I have seen professional developers do under a deadline. :-)
by maratc | 2025-05-26 15:31:52+00:00
If I'm reading myself right, I'm suggesting that there's no need to "the solution to housing shortage," since -- with more than 2 rooms per person on average -- it's not a problem to begin with. The problem frequently called "the housing shortage" is a problem of "housing affordability in the megacities," and we should call it by its real name.
by Footpost | 2025-05-26 15:32:04+00:00
Andy Pitts' writing is extremely clear, whatever he writes about. This clarity is not easy to achieve and shows mastery!

The full abstraction for PCF was solved in the mid 1990s by Abramsky/Jagadeesan/Malacaria [1] Hyland/Ong [2] and Nickau [3]. All three appeared simultaneously. This was a paradigm shift, because all three used used interactive rather than functional models of computation. (There was also later work on domain theoretic full abstraction, e.g. O Hearn and Riecke [4], but I can't recall details. Maybe Streicher's work was in this direction?) The beauty of interative models like games is that they can naturally encode more complex behaviour, including parallelism.

[1] S. Abramsky, R. Jagadeesan, P. Malacaria, Full Abstraction for PCF.

[2] J.M. E. Hyland, C.-H. L. Ong, On Full Abstraction for PCF: I, II, and III.

[3] H. Nickau, Hereditarily sequential functionals.

[4] P. O'Hearn, J. G. Riecke, Kripke logical relations and PCF.