MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by mike_hearn | 2025-05-12 08:46:11+00:00
I had an explanation of that but deleted it because the article is already too long. The Joe-E paper explains their reasoning. Briefly, Java uses exceptions to indicate certain kinds of errors that might leave the application in an undefined state like stack overflows, running out of memory and so on. Finally blocks allow you to execute code after those events occur. Therefore, sandboxed code could run code inside a VM that's entered a somewhat indeterminate state.

This shows up a subtle detail of sandboxing schemes that are often overlooked. The guarantees Java provides around safety are tightly scoped and often little more than saying the JVM itself won't crash. It's not that hard to arrange for a stack overflow to occur whilst some standard library code is running, which means execution can abort in nearly any place. If the code you're calling into isn't fully exception-safe, it means the libraries global variables (if any) can be left in a logically corrupted state, which might be exploitable.

If Java finally blocks had a filter clause, that could help, but finally is sometimes implicit as with try-with-resources.
by DoingIsLearning | 2025-05-12 08:47:01+00:00
I would argue that the software quality of ADAS systems is very different from Infotainment.

Infotainment systems are a race to the bottom on BOM+SW price point. ADAS OEM's understand that there is a human cost, liability, and reputational cost for failure.

The real risk with these monoliths is when companies start to remove the distributed/redundant nature of safety critical systems, in order to reduce hardware costs.

There are multiple very good reasons for a distributed system in a car. However, irrespective of how clever your architecture is, there is only one good reason for centralized systems in a car and that is cost. It benefits no one but shareholders and C-suite.

OTA updates are sold as a key benefit but again it's marketing, they only reduce costs for the manufacturers and effectively remove a lot of the penalties of recalls. I would argue that difficult/costly recalls put pressure on manufacturers for 'first time right' design, OTA favours happy-go-lucky software.
by lproven | 2025-05-12 08:48:17+00:00
> As they say, AMA!

Are you also this Michael Geary?

«Meet the first guy Steve Jobs ever fired at Apple ... and he wasn't even an employee»

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/meet-first-guy-steve-jobs-130...

«Why an Older Google Contract Programmer Left Google»

https://www.businessinsider.com/why-an-older-google-contract...
by ammo1662 | 2025-05-12 08:49:43+00:00
Yes. this statistics included the previously imposed 20% tariffs, but on China's side, it only included this newly added 125% without accounting for the previous countermeasures against the 20%.

Though it's worth noting China's initial counter-tariffs only targeted key products, so the presentation isn't technically incorrect.

That's why I said it is a good propaganda.

They have a good diagram here:

https://edition.cnn.com/2025/04/12/business/us-china-tariffs...
by raxxorraxor | 2025-05-12 08:50:01+00:00
I think scrapping such goals is sensible. For a software company 40% women might just not be feasible. It just doesn't match the pipeline for general IT. Having such a quota is discrimination on the other hand.

Also in German society there was the insinuation that this imbalance must be a result of discrimination. There is a neuroticism around gender which was sadly imported from the US. All in all it simply wasn't helpful for anyone and that at least is what should count.

So for anyone at least adept in math, Trumps order does indeed reduce discrimination. But that will be a difficult lesson in German society and elsewhere.

Surprisingly I don't believe Trump to be wrong here.
by lukan | 2025-05-12 08:50:33+00:00
"I don’t know why socialism, Marxism, or whatever is blamed for dictators doing bad things for good/bad/no reason. "

Maybe because the base of the theory comes with violence included? The need to take something of other people away(means of production) and maintain that order against expected resistance of the current owners?

It is really not surprising to me, that all experiments ended with totalitarism, because how else to do it like this?

(I am pretty sure there was some exchange between Marx and Engels I read, that already discussed the need to have camps where all the capitalists would have to be imprissoned)

Also there is the concept of global domination. As far as I understood it - Marxism needs to rule globally to really work. No other model allowed. But in reality there are indefinite more possibilities between socialism and capitalism. But then again, I did not read much Marx. What I read confirmed what the (stalinists influenced) socialist priests told me before. And they definitely had the world revolution concept ingrained. But I also met and debated with lots of other alternative folks and the totalitarian concept seems universal with marxists.

Anarchistic socialism is a bit of a different story, but in my eyes the same principle, just more local.
by pjmlp | 2025-05-12 08:50:34+00:00
Microsoft has yet to produce a tool that makes as convinient to produce/consume COM libraries.

.NET support has been through a few reboots, and it is much more low level.

For a technology that nowadays runs so deep on Windows APIs, it is really surprising how Windows Development team is not capable to embrace better tooling for COM, only mini-projects that eventually are left abandoned as people move on.
by prennert | 2025-05-12 08:51:23+00:00
How do the people who dont deny the risk and dont want to damage the economy propose to handle this situation? Not changing things fast enough just kicks the can down the road to the younger and future generations.

Even for the middle-aged, climate damage might really make their retirement vastly different from todays pensioner life. If insurance is exorbitantly expensive (due to massive pay-outs year-after-year), safe place to live are scarce and expensive (due to neglection to build housing in safe areas for decades), then a lot of money has to be spend on basics. Property prices (and insurance) have a massive impact on any base-level pricing of everything, but mostly essentials: shelter and food.

Its even worse for the younger generation who will struggle to build up wealth, when growth is impossible due to regular wipe-outs of massive amount of wealth due to disasters, not to speak of wars triggered by mass migrations out of places that are untenable to live.
by nextaccountic | 2025-05-12 08:51:59+00:00
Maybe consider sled? https://github.com/spacejam/sled

It's been abandoned for some years, the author was working on a new engine for it and in the last 5 days they started working again on sled proper. However, it's pretty good the way it is (the 0.34.7 release from 2021 https://crates.io/crates/sled), despite the beta warnings

More info here https://dbdb.io/db/sled

(Note, non affiliated to the author, just liked the project)
by pjc50 | 2025-05-12 08:52:24+00:00
This is, incidentally, why it's so important to have a free market in software separate from hardware, despite what Apple may think. You can't have a free market competing on every possible feature; some features are going to be dominant. So people will choose cars based on size, aesthetics, price and brand .. but not on the quality of the software, which is very hard for them to evaluate even on a test drive.
by InsideOutSanta | 2025-05-12 08:52:31+00:00
> But it sounds very patronizing to say the “there’s a lot of poor people who don’t understand credit, so we need to prevent them from having access to any so they don’t get the chance to screw themselves”, so I understand why no one does.

OTOH, the article literally says that "data [shows] that those with lower incomes, lower education, and worse credit (redundancies here) are more likely to use BNPL."

Most consumer protection laws are somewhat patronizing, but since you can't be an expert in everything, we need them.
by DanielHB | 2025-05-12 08:52:51+00:00
I worked in similar systems and you are 100% right. 80% of the time was spent on communication protocols between the different boards and microcontrollers. QAing and solving issues from short-sighted dozens of unique custom protocols that worked in non-standard ways (every time a component needs to talk to another component a new protocol was invented).

When you have dozens of communication lines required between different parts of the system it becomes just as complicated as your average micro-service cloud. Really, a car is a distributed system with dozens of "services". An analogy is that each microcontroller-microcontroller communication use their own custom binary-encoding API that runs on multiple different, incompatible versions of HTTP.

We actually spent considerable amount of time just developing our own custom protocol for communication that could run on all sorts of different physical interfaces (CAN, ethernet, modbus, etc) as well as a series of proxies between devices (so component A can talk to component C through a proxy in component B). And if we had to use a custom protocol from an external manufacturer we had to wrap it into our own custom protocol.

That protocol was actually used for our cloud data reporting as well, so eventually all our data communication would use a single unified protocol from micro-controller to IoT Linux to cloud data-ingestion pipeline to database.
by lll-o-lll | 2025-05-12 08:52:54+00:00
> Why would someone who comes up with information theory want to give it to an employer?

Why would someone who is not motivated by financial gain care?

> I was motivated more by curiosity. I was never motivated by the desire for money, financial gain. I wasn't trying to do something big so that I could get a bigger salary.

— Claude Shannon
by BoxOfRain | 2025-05-12 08:52:58+00:00
It really pains me that the people involved in this cover-up likely led lives of absurd luxury rather than seeing the meanest hint of justice for what they did.

People talk about climate change as though we're all equally responsible but this is false, there may be few saints on this subject but there's certainly degrees of sinner and these people are at the very highest level of blame in my opinion. How much of the world will be uninhabitable by the end of the century due to their lies delaying timely climate action?
by kev009 | 2025-05-12 08:52:59+00:00
This is weird because the microprocessor industry owes a lot of early success to automotive companies. Motorola 6800, Intel 8061 (https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/history/virtual-vaul...) etc. Quoting wikipedia: "the name "Motorola" by linking "motor" (from motor car) with "ola" (from Victrola), which was also a popular ending for many companies at the time, e.g. Moviola, Crayola"

TI has some powerful automotive SoCs like the AM69A/TDA4AH (https://www.ti.com/ds_dgm/images/fbd_sprsp79b.svg) that target the industry.. 8 Cortex-A72s, a full GPU, multiple Cortex R5Fs that can lockstep, and a bunch of powerful C7000 DSPs. The SDK is probably not awesome as embedded BSPs tend to be but the SoC should be workable. That should be plenty of compute.

So what is really going on, and what happened?
by ItaiZeilig | 2025-05-12 08:53:09+00:00
After seeing countless businesses struggle with manual data entry and document management, we built DocumentsFlow – a smart, automated solution that:

Scans and reads documents (OCR) with 92%+ accuracy.

Detects anomalies in real-time with a smart rule engine.

Automatically updates fields and journal entries in your ERP (SAP, QuickBooks, and more).

Provides a secure digital archive for all documents.

Ask me anything about how it works or how it can help your business!
by pjmlp | 2025-05-12 08:54:01+00:00
Except if you need to touch COM.

The RCW/CCW approach is much more low level, to the point there are whole books on how to use COM in .NET, whereas it was just part of how to program in VB (pre-.NET).

It also went through two reboots.

So now you have .NET COM support for .NET Framework, COM/WinRT support for UWP, modern .NET support for COM.

Every variation with its own APIs, only the classical .NET Framework approach has Visual Studio "import COM component" support, and none of them as easy as VB 6 was in the end.

Quite bad as developer experience, given the COM focus since Windows Vista.
by roenxi | 2025-05-12 08:54:37+00:00
It's plausible, but I think the experience thus far is any dust in the lungs is a health risk. Asbestos will not be soon forgotten.

I'd be more worried about testing phosphogypsum's mechanical properties before anyone starts testing the radioactive ones. And danger relative to tyre rubber; although that has probably already been studied somewhere since it is an obvious thing to check.
by whywhywhywhy | 2025-05-12 08:54:38+00:00
Cursor is good for basic stuff but Windsurf consistently solves issues Cursor fails on even after 40+ mins of retries and prompting changes.

Cursor is very lazy about looking beyond the current context or even context at all sometimes it feels it’s trying to one shot a guess without looking deeper.

Bad thing about Windsurf is the plans are pretty limited and the unlimited “cascade base” feels dumb the times I used it so ultimately I use Cursor until I hit a wall then switch to Windsurf.
by noosphr | 2025-05-12 08:54:51+00:00
>And while a VC fund is limited in what it can do in providing open-ended freedom. It can try to provide a meaningful simulacrum of that space and community, which is why I’m so excited about programs like 1517’s Flux that invests $100k in people, no questions asked and lets them explore for a few months without demanding KPIs or instantaneous progress.

>>You can move to the United States. (We will help with visas.)

This is no longer viable for anyone who isn't already a US citizen. Not sure how serious about investing in individuals that VC is, but from talking to 16 to 22 year olds _none_ of them want to move to the US with ICE deporting students for saying the wrong thing online - or the perception they do. US universities and businesses are suffering from brain drain that unless reversed in the next 3 years will be a drag on the US economy for decades.
by lproven | 2025-05-12 08:55:19+00:00
I think I saw, mentioned in the system requirements, "Windows 2000 or above" or something like that.

I do wonder how cross-platform your code will be, though. I suppose it depends on whether it talks to Win32, or Gtk2, or Qt4, or Qt 5, or Qt 6... etc.

I wonder if FPC+Lazarus could be wired up to Tk so that there was a portable, cross-platform toolkit as well...?
by charcircuit | 2025-05-12 08:55:20+00:00
The author is an associate professor at Harvard, so he is going to be biased towards academia.

>knows that our field’s landmark innovations emerged not purely from product roadmaps but from university labs with federal funding

Maybe if you cherry pick those innovations from things coming from university labs. Or count these labs because they openly announced something or popularized something else that already existed.

>The Talent Pipeline Under Threat

Talent can be taught by both AI and industry. University as a place for learning is an outdated concept.
by ido | 2025-05-12 08:55:41+00:00
The jokes were mostly about startup time for the JVM (only happens once as when its in RAM it stays there and the loading time doesn't repeat for the next java program you run). It was also a lot more notable in the 90s when java was a browser plugin to run applets and browsers were single threaded (so the browser froze for a few seconds while the JVM loaded).

I think it's been out of date for a long time with modern computers having much more RAM and speedy SSDs (and also JVM optimizations). For actual run time performance once its loaded the JVM has had great performance in the early 00s already and improved since. And for server side it was never an issue as you don't restart the server very often (so the JVM is always already loaded).
by TwoFerMaggie | 2025-05-12 08:55:57+00:00
But why would the merchants willing to pay the fees in providing a BNPL scheme for their customers?

One would assume that it would increase sales, which makes it worthwhile. It's not caused by increase outreach though: from what I've seen, BNPL is usually an additional payment option when you're already on the product page.

Then the question becomes: who are the extra customers that a BNPL scheme would bring, that wouldn't have made the purchase if such a scheme was not available?
by phire | 2025-05-12 08:56:02+00:00
> if I am not mistaken – Intel contemplated phasing out the x86 ISA and replacing it with i960, but there was a change of plans,

I don't think there was ever any serious thought about replacing x86 with i960 (at least nothing publicly). There was a serious plan to replace x86 with the iAPX 432, which is the predecessor to the i960, but those plans all predated x86 becoming a run-away success when the IBM PC became an industry standard. And "replace" is kind of over stating it, there was no plan for any compatibility, not even source compatibility. It's more that they were planning for iAPX 432 to take the "workstation CPU" spot on their product chart that was currently occupied by the 8086.

By the time the i960 was in development, x86 was so entrenched that I really doubt there could have been any serious thoughts of replacing x86 with something that wasn't fully backwards compatible.

And we know that when Intel did try to replace x86 with Itanium, they went with a hardware backwards compatibility mode.

> I was actually commenting on the need to support aspect being a myth.

Yes, you have a point that it should have been possible to replace x86 with a software emulation approach.

But the only person who can really do that is the platform owner. Apple were quite successful with their 68k to PowerPC transition. And the PowerPC to x86 transition. And the x86 to Aarch64 transition. But that transition really needs to be done by the platform owner.

But the PC didn't really have an owner. IBM had lost control of it. You could argue that Microsoft had control, but they didn't have enough control (especially with DOS. Most DOS programs were bypassing DOS to some extent or another and directly accessed hardware). Intel certainly didn't have enough control to transition to another arch.

(The PC had such high demands for backwards compatibility that even the Pentium Pro ran into issue. It worked, but it simply wasn't fast enough when executing instructions with 16-bit operands. Attempting to run DOS or win95 apps would be slower than a 486. So the Pentium Pro was limited to the market of Windows NT workstations running Apps with full 32-bit code. Intel had to fix this with the Pentium II before they could sell the P6 arch outside of the workstation market.)

Intel didn't even have control over x86 itself. Other companies were already making competing CPU designs that were faster than Intel's own. If Intel didn't keep releasing faster x86 designs, then someone else would steal all of their market share. Intel were more or less forced to keep releasing faster native x86 designs, or they would lose what little control they did have.
Show HN: A Human-Centered Protocol for Containment-Aware AI Design
by architect137 | 2025-05-12 08:57:11+00:00
I’ve written a small protocol for engineers and researchers working on advanced AI systems LLMs, agents, simulators, where alignment can’t be assumed.

It’s called the "AI Human Protection Protocol". It’s not a manifesto or policy paper. It’s a design-layer spec focused on recursive coherence, boundary maintenance, and preserving human agency as systems scale.

I've done some evaluation against common symbolic failure patterns, including recursive collapse scenarios like Roko’s Basilisk, Surveillance Capitalism, Technocracy, Synthetic Gods, Simulated Suffering (Hellbox), 2001: A Space Odyssey, The Matrix... all the classics.

It’s meant as a practical foundation for containment-aware system design, simple enough to implement, general enough to extend.

If you’re working in the space and want to help pressure-test or improve it, I’d appreciate feedback. Especially from folks who’ve thought deeply about recursion, autonomy, or edge-case behaviour in aligned systems.

Protocol: https://github.com/fieldarchitect137/AI-Human-Protection-Pro...

Core breach pattern reference: https://github.com/fieldarchitect137/AI-Human-Protection-Pro...
by actionfromafar | 2025-05-12 08:58:11+00:00
I guess, on average, you could still gain a couple of milliseconds, of absolute reaction time from time to time in a game. If you are a pro, or like to cosplay as pro, that tiny advantage could add up. After a season of tournaments, you may get in an extra hit or two when it was extremely close between you and the other player.

Sort of like high-frequency trading but with humans.

This is my best steelman.
by raxxorraxor | 2025-05-12 08:59:17+00:00
As an embedded developer I usually point to the fact that there is generalist hard and software available for the primitive problem an infotainment systems needs to solve. At least for that side I don't see how generalist pc hardware wouldn't suffice and fit probably 95% of use cases.

At least that is how I build my self-made system, which is quite awesome compared to solutions you generally see in cars. Not for the average consumer, but classic car makers can do much better with a bit of courage.
by LeonM | 2025-05-12 08:59:21+00:00
I don't understand this sentiment.

Should all VW drivers have a "I hate Hitler" sticker on their car too?

Because in case you aren't aware: VW was started by the German Labour Front (part of the Nazi party). Adolf Hitler himself oversaw early development of the first models.

Why the need to apologize for the CEO of the company that you buy products from? Should we also have an "I hate Foxconn" sticker on every Apple device?
by CelestialMystic | 2025-05-12 08:59:34+00:00
Not less software, no software. Have a quick flick through this video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQlFIl18x9g

Obviously I don't expect you to watch all of this but to have the lights working you need to program a computer to do so. This guy had problems just sourcing the right "module", then it has to be programmed. The car is basically an ornament until they fix it. This vehicle is about 20 years old and seems to be in reasonable condition for its age and would otherwise be perfectly fine to drive on the road. Now he is lucky to be friends with a guy that has access to the BMW software and has decent knowledge of how the software works.

Contrast that to my 1994 Land Rover Defender. There isn't a computer in it at all. The most complicated electronics is probably the wiper circuit and (which is partly mechanical). To fix electrical issues you use a multi-meter and adding/removing fuses. My toolbox is spanners, screwdrivers, socket set and a multi-meter. I managed to fix my vehicle in a car park at 11pm, with no prior experience of repairing this vehicle.

If you want things to be able to be repaired by normal people they have to be simpler and typically that means everything has to be modular with a well define spec or easily reproducible for a person in his shed with easily available tools. The trade off is that it won't be refined.