MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by weitendorf | 2025-06-30 17:39:21+00:00
I've been thinking a ton about this over the last year and I think this is actually overcomplicating things. Generally from what I can tell, most of what makes Auth so painful is overcomplicating things.

My belief is that the only two things you need to know to understand Auth are Identity and your Authorization model. Everything else is just a consequence of those two things.

Consumer and B2B auth are different mostly because they have different identity and authorization models, neither of which are really that complicated to identify:

1. Consumers theoretically control their own identity but in practice almost all delegate it to gmail, facebook, microsoft, etc. Businesses have actual control over their employee's identities because they own domains and emails get routed to wherever they point their domain at.

2. Consumer authorization models by default give the user access to all of their data and none of anybody else's data, unless explicitly configured otherwise. Business authorization models work exactly the same way for admins (meaning, control of the business' source of identity gives them access to ~all of the business' data). It's kind of insane to give everybody access to everybody's data so businesses create ontologies of roles/groups/scopes so that each employee only gets just as much admin powers as they require.

Why does it work that way? Well, when you control your own identity like consumers and admins, you want to just get things done without permission and auth getting in the way. When you control other people's identity you aren't personally subject to the difficulties that arise from locking things down, but you are responsible for their identity and what that identity can do, so you do what you can to limit access.

It all kinda reduces down to the problem that the Internet didn't come with a good system for managing identity, so we all use accounts based on email, which is based on domains, which route traffic using DNS, which basically sends all the account recovery/verification/communication record for every employee of a company to one spot. There is an inherent escalation of privilege vulnerability there, and there's no good fix, so we resign ourselves to a security model that says 1. centralize all information in one place 2. do whatever possible to hide, compartmentalize, and limit access to that information. It feels insane because it is insane.

Being responsible for only your own identity, actions, access, and data: makes sense. Being responsible for everybody else's actions, access, and data (because your job is managing the thing that centralized it all in one place): nightmare fuel.
by masswerk | 2025-06-30 17:39:37+00:00
In Northanger Abbey we get an explicit reference to one of those books, The Mysteries of Udolpho by Ann Radcliffe, which started the entire Gothic novel craze. Comparing the two is quite informative: Where Radcliffe describes the basic character traits over a page or two, followed by another page how fortunately this added up with the specific situation in life, Austen gives us a one-sentence-or-less description of the social characteristics of a character, maybe followed by a short remark on how this character deviated from what was to be expected from this. And, where Radcliffe's characters break into tears to assert their humanity, over and over again (something that can be still observed in Bram Stoker's Dracula, but thankfully much rarer), Austen's characters just chase their follies, which are more often than not a class marker. (If you thought modern times were car-crazy, just look at those gigs!)

In this sense, where characters are established by just dropping social position and economic status as sort of a blueprint, Jane Austen is a surprisingly materialist author. To paraphrase a well known quote, she turned Radcliffe from the head to the feet. ;-)
Iran's Internet Blackout Accidentally Revealed Coordinated Narrative in the West
by Memetic-tracer | 2025-06-30 17:39:52+00:00
Here's the uncomfortable truth about the weaponization of X.

When Israel attacked Iran, several Scottish independence accounts went dark—at the same time Iran's internet collapsed.

This wasn’t a one-off. It was a proof of concept: Foreign and domestic actors are actively weaponizing social media to manipulate public opinion, and they’re using the platforms we trust to do it.

Seeing it happen—live—was surreal. I always suspected this was going on. But witnessing it? Seeing the curtain slip? And no one cares? That shook me.

So I asked Grok, the AI built into X:

“Why hasn’t AI been used to track the origin of political phrases, coordinated narratives, and synthetic consensus?”

Grok’s answer?

“I could, given the right data and a nudge.”

Think about that. The AI admits:

It can trace who seeded a narrative

Map who echoed it in seconds

Detect fake consensus driven by coordinated networks

But then it drops the real bomb:

“I don’t run real-time propaganda trackers—though I could.”

That’s not just capability. That’s power without accountability.

And why won’t it be deployed?

Because doing so would reveal that platform discourse isn’t organic. It’s curated. Shaped. Injected. And someone doesn’t want us to know that.

This isn’t a tech limitation. It’s a will problem. A trust problem. And yeah—a moral problem.

If we don’t demand transparency from the systems shaping our minds, we’re not just being manipulated. We’re volunteering for it.
by tpmoney | 2025-06-30 17:40:08+00:00
This was definitely the way Apple (used to) teach their employees. The 3 big “rules” were

1) No upsell pressure. We all got a flat hourly wage, so whether you bought the 5k computer or the 1k computer, we earned the same money. So focus on selling the customer the right computer for their needs.

2) It’s better to send the customer somewhere else or let them walk out the door than it is to sell them something that won’t work for them. Sort of a corollary to the first item, but the idea was more than anything, customers should feel like they could trust us. And if building that trust meant telling the customer “we do have USB cables, but the Belkin one we’re selling for $25 is no better for your printer than the generic brand Best Buy is selling across the street” then that’s what we did. A customer who trusts us is a customer that comes back, and a customer that comes back is a customer that buys more things. Sure they may not buy the USB cable today, but next month when they’re buying some other thing for their computer, they might just pick up some other cable or item that they might be able to get cheaper elsewhere, but they’re already here, we have it and they trust us to stock quality items.

3) Never ever make something up or guess. All the computers are fully functional and hooked up to the internet for a reason. If you don’t know the answer, tell that to the customer and take them over to a computer and look it up with them. You get a chance to demo the machine, you get a chance to let the customer try out the machine and most importantly you maintain that trust. The customer can feel confident you’re not bullshitting them, and they can feel confident in the answer you finally do reach because you looked it up together.

Apple’s opposition to being anything like CompUSA or other computer retailers at the time was IMO a huge factor in making their stores as big and popular as they were and are. Unfortunately my experience by the time I left was Apple’s rapid growth meant they were hiring more and more from outside the pool of “Apple enthusiasts ” and more and more from the wider retail world. It’s really hard to “untrain” the “high pressure commission sales” mindset from folks who have needed to live off that sort of sales approach. We’d also started to see some of it come down from above in the form of tracking individual “attachment metrics” like AppleCare. Back when AppleCare didn’t have accidental damage coverage, the pressure to sell AppleCare with the product in question rather than after the fact (at the time, up to 1 year after purchase) was antithetical to their otherwise strong focus on no upsells and building trust.
by alfalfasprout | 2025-06-30 17:40:13+00:00
Access old ideas? Yes. With new perspectives? Not necessarily. An LLM may be able to assist in interpreting data with new perspectives but in practice they're still fairly bad at greenfield work.

As with most things, the truth lies somewhere in the middle. LLMs can be helpful as a way of accelerating certain kinds and certain aspects of research but not others.
by dylan604 | 2025-06-30 17:40:21+00:00
I guess FloridaMan won't be doing this as they've recently passed legislation to ban this type of stuff. I think this is one of those cases where it was done for the wrong reasons, but it kind of works out in the end

https://www.tallahassee.com/story/news/politics/2025/06/23/c...
by groby_b | 2025-06-30 17:40:23+00:00
At least for me, the core criticism of AI 2027 was always that it was an extremely simplistic "number go up, therefore AGI", with some nice fiction-y words around it.

The scribble model kind-of hints at what a better forecast would've done - you start from the scribbles and ask "what would it take to get that line, and how'd we get there". And I love that the initial set of scribbles will, amongst other things, expose your biases. (Because you draw the set of scribbles that seems plausible to you, a priori)

The fact that it can both guide you towards exploring alternatives and exposing biases, while being extremely simple - marvellous work.

Definitely going to incorporate this into my reasoning toolkit!
by Pet_Ant | 2025-06-30 17:40:38+00:00
Tangentially related, I remember reading about an ancient still being developed adventure game. It was from Eastern Europe (former Yugoslavia, I want to say) about being trapped in a prison that had crazy amounts of depth and consequences. One of them being something like picking up a random unused condom on the floor will result in the pregnancy of another character in a later chapter. I've searched for it again and can't find it, and I couldn't have dreamed it up.

Anyone know the game?
by SR2Z | 2025-06-30 17:40:42+00:00
> I personally am not fond of eating hot degraded PTFE

If this is a problem, you should buy a new printer that actually keeps the filament conduits away from the hotend. This is a health hazard regardless of food safety - decomposed PTFE is nasty stuff to breathe in.

> Or the trace remains of charred ASA/ABS I printed last week through the same nozzle...

Fair enough, but I would also say that you should be purging old filament anyways before starting a new one. My slicer does this by default.

> Or in fact any of the various coatings of the heated bed or leftover trace amounts of previous prints...

These days, heated beds are covered in PEI. That's food-safe too.

I think your take is a little panicky and not supported by the evidence. It is perfectly fine to print single-use food stuff out of PLA, especially if you just have a roll or two of the pure (undyed) stuff around. You're much more likely to get sick from the food itself than the plastic it touched for a little while, and PLA is relatively biodegradable compared to most other plastic foodware.
by rzzzt | 2025-06-30 17:40:43+00:00
Vaguely related - two encoder wheel projects on YouTube that might interest you:

- "Wireless High Resolution Scrolling is Amazing": https://youtu.be/FSy9G6bNuKA

- "DIY haptic input knob: BLDC motor + round LCD": https://youtu.be/ip641WmY4pA
by MPLan | 2025-06-30 17:40:56+00:00
Public predictions about the impact of genAI on workers and the economy are dramatic – but are they right?

Depending on our assumptions on the effectiveness of AI, economic models often suggest outcomes differing from what we see in the public sphere. For example, employment may rise in AI impacted jobs if the level expertise needed for the non-automatable parts of the job is not high.
by tech_ken | 2025-06-30 17:41:05+00:00
I think they are way less separable than you do. Moreover, I would say that while the current stewardship has notable flaws they are far, far fewer and less grave than previous iterations. No iteration is worthy of the space it holds, but progress comes through honest introspection exactly like what has followed the replication crisis you described. Simply bulk-axing research grants that fail to properly kowtow to the current president’s political ideology is a much cruder tool, and one which seems unfit to really address the concerns you described in your original post.
by elif | 2025-06-30 17:41:19+00:00
This sounds cool, my dentist is probably even cool enough to buy one when it's fda approved, but like the "wave form analysis" device they bought this year, it will only be used for specialist purposes and can't be used to replace x rays, or in this case periodontal proving, and almost entirely because of the slow moving insurance industry. (I even asked how much I could pay cash to replace x rays, because fuck radiation, the answer was we have to x ray you)
by trollbridge | 2025-06-30 17:41:20+00:00
Teach, and require, students to handwrite (without a machine such as a smartphone or a PC nearby) whatever quizzes and homework and exams they need to do. Of course, this would mean professors and TAs would have to actually go back to hand-scoring work, instead of lazily leaving it up to their classroom management software.

Beyond that written work, more of what universities examine of students should be students actually standing up and speaking about their work (without a machine assisting them).
by Animats | 2025-06-30 17:41:25+00:00
That's really the only tangible recommendation in the article.

The real problem for universities is this: much of what classical academia claims is important is not all that hard for a LLM. Writing "compare and contrast" student papers, research which consists of digging through existing texts and summarizing, and writing in a formal style are all things LLMs do. Probably better than most undergraduates.

This shakes the philosophical foundations of academia. What are universities for now? Job training? Sorting the winners from the losers? Something else?
by mattmaroon | 2025-06-30 17:41:33+00:00
No evidence was provided for the assertion to begin with, why must the contrary provide evidence but not the base assertion? You provided an opinion with no facts and then criticized me for doing the same.

But the evidence is other countries aren’t complaining that Ohio offering tax credits to get a a Ford plant to go there instead of Pennsylvania is gutting their automotive industry. Which is exactly the issue we’re discussing.

Any such tax credits are simply American states competing against other American states, and have little to no ramification on the overall cost of an automobile, even domestically, let alone globally.

Meanwhile, China is doing loads of very well documented things that would make the automotive industry impossible for anyone outside of China if not for protectionist policies. Many other countries (basically any that make automobiles) are instituting tariffs as a result.
by cynicalpeace | 2025-06-30 17:41:59+00:00
StarStories: You get a real physical book featuring members of your family

https://www.starstories.ai/

1. Upload photos of your family members (or describe them if you don't want to upload)

2. Select a topic

3. See draft book

4. Make edits if you want

5. Order book

6. Read book to your kids

7. Read book to your kids

8. Continue on loop
Martech Engineer
by smwbauer | 2025-06-30 17:42:06+00:00
Founding Engineer

Inspo is the first end-to-end AI creative strategy engine that slashes the creative cycle to < 5 minutes while improving quality, variety, and strategic rigor.

We’ve built a v1 on Lovable; it’s already turning heads inside top DTC agencies. Now we need a founding engineer who can upgrade and scale.

What You’ll Own

Product Engine Room – Rewrite the Lovable prototype into a rock-solid, secure, horizontally scalable service

AI Pipeline – Orchestrate multi-model chains that turn raw brand data → insights → creative calendars → ready-to-run briefs.

Velocity Infra – CI/CD, observability, feature-flagging, A/B harnesses so we can ship daily alongside the founder.

Integrations – Meta Marketing API, Social Media APIs, Slack/Notion/Zapier hooks, SSO, usage-based billing.

Technical Vision – Choose architecture, set code standards, hire early engineers, and shape our IP moat.

You Might Be a Fit If

You’ve scaled a full-stack app from hacked MVP → thousands of paid seats.

You wield TypeScript/Next.js, Python, or Go—but care more about shipping than dogma.

You’ve wrangled LLMs, embeddings, vector DBs, or built complex workflow SaaS.

Ads, e-com, or martech experience? Great. If not, you learn markets on weekends.

Current State (2-min Loom)

https://www.loom.com/share/de03a2857c85493eabf38f258f1eb490

Logistics & Comp

Location: Remote, bonus points for NYC/NJ local

Comp: Meaningful Equity + Competitive Salary

Start Date: Yesterday.

If interested, email brett@thecreativestrategyagency.com with:

Github profile

Why + How you will make us win

What you’d refactor in our Loom demo

We’re sprinting for industry domination in the next 12 months.

Why Inspo Will Win

$121 B Meta ads market and rising. Creative strategy—not media buying—now drives >70 % of performance variance.

Agencies are scrambling to generate hundreds of briefs per week; current tools only spit out finished ads.

No serious competitor is attacking the strategy layer—the real leverage point in ROAS.

We’re spinning out of a premier NYC creative agency with deep brand access, instant distribution, and paying design partners.
by Night_Thastus | 2025-06-30 17:42:49+00:00
I'm not an expert on the topic of OCD, what makes this 'bait'?

It's a bit long-winded and flowery for my taste, but otherwise OK?

I guess what I took away from it is that the underlying low-level biological causes of high-level behavioral problems is a very, very hard (ie: impossible) problem to solve with current technology. Like trying to debug a massive simulator that was written by randomly flipping bits until things worked, and has no manual, using only a hex editor.

That and despite current instances of it manifesting about modern things (phones, germs, whatever) OCD has likely existed for a very long time and just happens to 'cling' to something specific in a given person.
by duxup | 2025-06-30 17:42:52+00:00
One of the few games that really pulled off a "style" and story that really worked to fit between a movie and a game.

I remember playing Max Payne 2 when it came out and playing straight through. Max's last lines in that game I think really hits anyone who knows what loss is. Funny to say that about a video game but it works.
by munificent | 2025-06-30 17:43:20+00:00
I don't understand how the docs say:

"Non-Nullable Types by Default: In Helix, all types are non-nullable by default, significantly reducing the risk of null-pointer errors. Helix uses a novel approach to nullable types - Questionable Types, which allows for more explicit handling of null or panicking values."

But then when you look at questionable types, it says:

"You can use a questionable type like a regular variable. If you use it in a context where a non-questionable type is required, Helix implicitly checks its validity: If the value is valid, it proceeds. If the value is null or an error, the program stops with a crash."

Is that not exactly the same behavior that Java has?
by WorldMaker | 2025-06-30 17:43:29+00:00
A lot of the "magic" of UBI ideas is the time value of money and a lot of the same fundamental concepts as other forms of passive income. One way to think of it is your Government making a massive investment in "short term loans": your UBI payment is a loan of $X on April 16th with an expectation to pay Y% of $X back on April 15th of the following year (as the taxes you owe on the income you made that year). If Y% is greater than or equal to 100% it is exactly a loan, with interest. If Y% is less than 100% it is a government subsidized loan. A lot of the debate inside UBI discussion is what is the most effective Y%, and a lot of the beliefs about UBI is that you can do it with a surprisingly small Y% for among the same reasons that the Federal Reserve can give 0% loans to most banks. If they can give such favorable terms to short term loans to banks, why can't they give that to average citizens? When you look at all the complex deductions in the existing tax code as existing loans with favorable percent and add them together, that also drops your Y% and potentially simplifies things. (Instead of deducting lots of individual line items, you shift Y% individually, the terms of your personal annual loan agreement. Or you can leave Y% consistent and adjust $X up to replace deductions with larger loans.)

If "everyone" lives on $X - Y% * $X for an entire year the loans are fully repaid each year and the government isn't "losing money" on its "loan terms" and is meeting the subsidies people expect from their government. That's not a "losing" situation. (It's not a likely scenario either, because at least some people are always going to want more than $X - Y% * $X dollars a year for their lifestyle or their dreams or their investments or their philanthropy or their vices.)

(ETA: It's also not directly an assumption in every form of UBI that Y% is less than 100%. There are UBI schools of thought that because of the time value of money, some charged interest is not only possible, but potentially a good idea as an incentive to invest the UBI payment in more than just mortgage/rent/lifestyle, but also something that does appreciate you with interest, such as the opportunity cost of accepting a job or a basic savings account. I tend towards the Y% <= 100% feelings, but I understand the Y% > 100% crowd.)
by InkCanon | 2025-06-30 17:43:36+00:00
India has a (very) low base effect so it's absolute GDP growth is high. But it is growing much slower than China at the same point. Currently India is growing at about 6-7%, at the same GDP per capita China was growing at ~12%. If growth doesn't slow down, it'll take ~30 years to reach where China is now. There are lots of structural problems about the economy, and growth will likely be uneven and slower in the future.

But it is not a great place for these firms because disposable income is so low. For example, the US generates the most revenue per user for Google because it has a really high income. India is unlikely to make any significant part of tech firms revenue for a long time.
by WalterBright | 2025-06-30 17:44:19+00:00
In the 1970s it was all the rage that there were patents on 200 mpg carburetors, but the oil companies bought the patents in order to suppress those carburetors.

I asked my dad about it (career Air Force). He laughed and said that gasoline consumption was a major logistics problem for the military. If there were 100 mpg carburetors, the military was going to use them, and to hell with any patent blockade.

(Note all the problems the Germans had in WW2 when the US severely damaged their oil refineries.)
by jltsiren | 2025-06-30 17:44:22+00:00
You haven't seen examples of administrative downsizing, because it's rarely newsworthy. Universities routinely cut administrative and support staff according to their individual circumstances. Local news may take notice, but wider outlets rarely do.

My university has had several rounds of layoffs in the past couple of years. Now we apparently avoided one, as California reversed the proposed cuts to state funding. But I don't know how newsworthy that was either.
by jesse__ | 2025-06-30 17:44:25+00:00
Voxel engines are interesting because they're very much an area of active research. People are often coming up with novel techniques, and adapting traditional techniques in interesting ways. There isn't any good, singular resource for learning about voxel engine development thay I know of.

I'd recommend Handmade Hero for a more traditional resource on how to build a game engine. That's how I learned to program for real, and it worked great for me.