MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by AStonesThrow | 2025-06-05 05:20:47+00:00
It will be really exciting if we confirm one, then.

The spiral structure here is a hypothesis within a hypothesis. Whatever objects comprise the Oort Cloud, they haven't been directly observed. Scientists have inferred its existence from a variety of comets that seem related and have very, very long orbital periods, such as 200 years, or 2,000 years. So these comets are observed once-in-a-lifetime, or once-in-a-civilization, and the hypotheses say that they're being dislodged somehow from a "cloud of planetesimals" where a bunch more of them are found.

But this supposed cloud would be extremely sparse: plenty of space in-between the very small icy bodies, and individually, they're so much smaller, and so distant from the Sun, that they don't reflect enough light to our telescopes. They really don't send signals in other wavelengths, either, like a pulsar or quasar or something with an active powerplant.

This is beyond the Kuiper Belt, even; the Kuiper Belt, if it indeed be a belt, has offered us a couple of directly-observed objects, including Pluto and Charon.

So it's nice to conjecture and invent proposals for some kind of structure there, but the very existence and extent of the Oort Cloud is something that's been extrapolated and inferred from secondary evidence.
by int_19h | 2025-06-05 05:20:53+00:00
There's no particular reason why e.g. Australian English should have the same phonemic orthography as American English.

Nor is it some kind of insurmountable barrier to communication. For example, Serbian, Croatian, and Bosnian are all idiolects of the same language with some differences in phonemes (like i/e/ije) and the corresponding differences in standard orthographies, but it doesn't preclude speakers from understanding each other's written language anymore so than it precludes them from understanding each other's spoken language.
by rerdavies | 2025-06-05 05:21:03+00:00
Whatever happened to IPv6 site-local and link local address ranges (address ranges that were specifically defined as address ranges that would not cross router or WAN boundaries? They were in the original IPv6 standards, but don't seem to be implemented or supported. Or at least they aren't implemented or supported by my completely uconfigurable home cable router povided by my ISP.
by mdaniel | 2025-06-05 05:21:05+00:00
Heh, the irony doesn't escape me https://github.com/SWE-agent/SWE-agent/tree/v1.1.0/.cursor/r...

Anyway https://github.com/SWE-agent/SWE-agent/blob/v1.1.0/docs/usag... and https://github.com/SWE-agent/SWE-agent/blob/v1.1.0/docs/conf...
by Aurornis | 2025-06-05 05:21:53+00:00
> The method presented here relies on assessor data and valuations of land and improvement value.

One analysis I’d like to see is how a pure LVT tax shifts the tax burden toward people with less valuable homes while giving a break to people with nicer homes.

One of the overlooked upsides of taxing land and improvements separately is that it’s more progressive: People with more expensive houses pay more in taxes than their neighbors with less expensive houses.

Shifting to a pure LVT ignores the house because, of course, it’s a land value tax. So if you have the most expensive house in the neighborhood your taxes go down, but if you have the cheapest house on the block your taxes go up (assuming similar lot sizes and such).
by fhd2 | 2025-06-05 05:23:51+00:00
Ha, same. How do you use it? I tried all the fancy context management stuff multiple times, but I mostly just have a chat buffer open and copy paste stuff manually. Text wrangling is so damn efficient in Emacs. I pay around 10$ to Anthropic per month in API tokens for pretty heavy usage. With deliberate context management (I found keeping it small and focused vastly improves responses), cost is really not an issue.

Didn't try anything agentic within Emacs yet, don't find that helpful enough so far.
by quantified | 2025-06-05 05:23:57+00:00
Did Tesla release the 2023 software with verbiage of all the limitations and caveats that would make it clear how outdated and dangerous it was then, or did it announce it as being awesome and safe? If it was the former, I'll eat my underpants. If it was the latter, how can we trust anything written about the adequacy of FSD today?
Show HN: DIY Tutorials for Home Improvement Projects
by GouacheApp | 2025-06-05 05:25:45+00:00
Hey HN,

We just launched a new tutorials library on Patio, our community-driven DIY platform for home improvement. The goal: help homeowners and DIYers tackle projects with confidence.

What’s inside:

Step-by-step tutorials with photos, materials lists, time estimates, and difficulty levels

Tool recommendations shown in each tutorial.

Steps walkthroughs for key techniques and safety tips

We’re not sourcing materials yet through the marketplace, but tool discovery is live, and rentals are coming soon.

Would love your thoughts, feedback, or feature suggestions! → https://patio.so/tutorials

Julien
by const_cast | 2025-06-05 05:25:53+00:00
Sure, in the same was as "eat less" is a viable alternative for the obesity epidemic.

But it's not a solution. Obviously, that just won't work for people who have a propensity to over-consume, or people who have a propensity to scroll in this case. If it were that easy, then everyone would do it. Then we'd all hold hands and sing Kumbaya.
by tsimionescu | 2025-06-05 05:26:26+00:00
Agreed, we can do that, and it is done for many kinds of circuits. But many others don't work like that, so it's wrong to say that hardware works exclusively like this.

One other common pattern for implementing conditional logic is to compute a boolean expression in which the control signal is just another input variable. In that model, to compute Y ? foo(X) : bar(X), we actually compute baz(X, Y) whose result is the same. This is very commonly how ALUs work.

And the other very common pattern is to split this in multiple clock cycles and use registers for intermediate results. If you don't have two circuits A and B, only one circuit that can compute either A or B based on a control signal (such as simple processors with a single ALU), this is the only option: you take one clock cycle to put Y in a register, and in the next clock cycle you feed both Y and X into your single circuit which will now compute either A or B.
by verdverm | 2025-06-05 05:26:51+00:00
go fmt already changes one-liner if statements to be multi-line

you are proposing changing this, making code look different based on differences of opinions between developers

go fmt is actually one of the top rated features of Go, it makes everyone's code look the same, everyone has nitpicks about it, yet by and large it is one of the most loved things about Go. Breaking this is even less likely than changing error handling
by somenameforme | 2025-06-05 05:28:13+00:00
In a war of attrition (actually any war or even battle for that matter) the war is generally won by the enemy's morale breaking, not by literally running out of soldiers. When one side is losing and they know they're losing (or they see the conflict as not worth dying for), most people would prefer to save their own lives rather than die for nothing.

So you get desertion, refusal to enlist, rapid surrender, and so on. This results in the losing state having to resort to ever more brutal means of conscription such as literally dragging people in off the street, making it illegal to film such actions, making it illegal to leave the country, expanding the age range for conscription, and so on.

That all results in even worse morale which makes your fundamental problems even worse. That, in turn, can motivate the losing nation to expend soldiers/resources on missions which may have some propaganda benefit, but ultimately serve no military purpose whatsoever. And at some point it all just collapses like a house of cards.

---

And I think this fundamental issue of morale will be a perpetual in war. The winner will not be decided by who has the most drones, but by which side's morale breaks first. This is why Afghanistan, in terms of outcomes, is essentially the strongest military nation in the world. They've defeated both the US and the USSR in spite of being orders of magnitude behind in every single measure of military strength - except for morale. Those guys' spirit is simply unbreakable and they will fight you for decades, and to the last man, with absolutely no relenting.
by JimDabell | 2025-06-05 05:29:34+00:00
There’s a related paper that Meta published a couple of days ago that is worth looking at:

> How much do language models memorize?

— https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.24832

— https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44171363

It shows that models are limited in how much they can memorise (~3.6 bits per parameter), and once that threshold is reached, the model starts to generalise instead of memorise.
by protocolture | 2025-06-05 05:30:42+00:00
>it’s more progressive

Taxation based on realised employment income is more progressive. Any taxation based on unrealised gains/value is regressive, because it will be levied against people who may not have the income to support the taxation.

And yes, forcing people to move also costs money and can be seen as an extra levee against poor people who need to move to accommodate your new taxation model.

Proponents of LVT really hate poor and retired people, and tend to make up reams of excuses when this is put to them.

That might actually be the goal, to remove the last remaining poor people from gentrifying neighborhoods. All you have to do is build more expensive services, and subject the land to a new valuation and there you go, self removing poor people from your rich neighborhood.
by aredox | 2025-06-05 05:31:05+00:00
My God, not only this administration is dumb, but you are too, and, in true Dunning-Krueger fashion, you think everyone but you is. Yes, I have read almost all the executive orders: they are challenged by "so many lawsuits there aren't enough lawyers at DoJ to defend" because they are stupidly written, are based on fantasies and aren't legally sound down to being patently unconstitutional. Nobody intelligent would have e.g. tried to revoque birthright through an executive order - a right protected by an amendment that has been confirmed again and again for more than a century; not only that, but the idea you could revoque a constitutional amendment by en E.O. wpuld that the same can be done for... The second amendment. Is that the can of worms this administration is trying to open?

These guys "executed hard" the whims of an incompetent, uneducated, psychopathic, certainly terminally senile President. Have you read Trump's speeches? Read, not listened to.

The only practical outcomes so far have been books banned from some Army libraries, websites changed, and posturing. What has been accomplished in practice? Very little: the tariffs are in Schrodinger's cat state, the expulsions are lagging far behind their targets, the Army is loosing soldiers and equipment (Hesgeth is only renaming things), the transportation secretary is more worried about biblical paintings than fixing air controllers shortages, etc. etc.

But yeah, tell me how those guys executed a "coherent" strategy wrt. foreign trade. What's the strategy again?
by protocolture | 2025-06-05 05:33:01+00:00
Sad really, because I liked holding the flag button down before picking up the receiver, which displays OUT OF SERVICE until the receiver is lifted again.

I would find a bank of 3 busy payphones on a weekend, get 2 of them to display the message, and sit there with my mates laughing at the long line of payphone users.

Last I tried, this no longer worked on the free Telstra payphones. End of a mildly amusing prank era.
by zimpenfish | 2025-06-05 05:34:37+00:00
Did a quick check and yeah, there's a lot of redaction/blanks in `ADAS/ADS System Version`

Rpts RdBl Pcage Entity 48 12 25.00 Ford Motor Company 18 6 33.33 Rivian Automotive, LLC 10 4 40.00 Volkswagen Group of America, Inc. 29 12 41.38 Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC 38 18 47.37 Lucid USA, Inc. 27 15 55.56 Hyundai Motor America 37 22 59.46 Kia America, Inc. 6 4 66.67 APTIV 6 5 83.33 Porsche Cars North America, Inc. 12 10 83.33 Daimler Trucks North America, LLC 159 156 98.11 Honda (American Honda Motor Co.) 126 124 98.41 Subaru of America, Inc. 3003 3001 99.93 Tesla, Inc. 1 1 100.00 Nuro 2 2 100.00 Mazda North American Operations 6 6 100.00 Chrysler (FCA US, LLC) 71 71 100.00 BMW of North America, LLC
by potamic | 2025-06-05 05:34:40+00:00
This is insane, how does it make sense? Employee salary expenses are no different from other expenses to run your business. Imagine they did this for raw material instead, a restaurant could only expense 20% of the food that they sell. If they purchased $100 worth of food, but could only sell $50 worth of it, they have to pay tax on that even when making a net loss overall. It just does not make any sense. There would've been a huge uproar if this was done for cost of goods. Why are employee salary expenses any different?
by Dylan16807 | 2025-06-05 05:36:19+00:00
Until the car requests intervention and the timer runs out, levels 3 and 4 are supposed to have the same behavior. If that process has not happened, why should the driver's level of responsibility be any different?

(Though a consequence is that levels 3 and 4 are very close together in difficulty. We might not see many level 3 cars.)
by ChrisMarshallNY | 2025-06-05 05:36:25+00:00
We are all “main characters” of our own stories. If we keep the focus on ourselves, and what we have learned, from our own experiences, then we’re likely to be writing about stuff we know.

I have had decades of experience with people saying “I hate you” because I write software for Apple systems, so I’m not imagining it. I also know that I’m not alone. It’s not exactly a “cutting edge” mindset.

Personally, I’m offended. I think that it’s shallow. I have plenty of other fine qualities to hate.

I’m always tempted to project motivation and intention onto others, but I’m not very good at it, so I keep it to myself.
by Our_Benefactors | 2025-06-05 05:36:45+00:00
It’s a huge upgrade on the basis of allowing me to remove lightning cables from my life

On a specsheet basis it also charges faster and has a higher data transmission rate.

Lightning cables are not more robust. They are known to commonly short across the power pins, often turning the cable into an only-works-on-one-side defect. I replaced at least one cable every year due to this.
by hulitu | 2025-06-05 05:38:34+00:00
> January 0th makes sense because a year starts on January 1st. You count days of the year from 1 instead of from 0. So if we are going by the day of the year, day 1 of the year should be Jan1, the consequence of this being that Jan0 exists and is Dec31 of the prev year.

That's how bugs get introduced. /s
by westurner | 2025-06-05 05:39:14+00:00
Dr. Sbaitso: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dr._Sbaitso

...

Clean Language questions might be good.

Clean Language: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clean_language

From https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40085678 :

> Clean Language questions : https://cleanlearning.co.uk/blog/discuss/clean-language-ques...
by inkyoto | 2025-06-05 05:40:51+00:00
The need for regular re-spelling and problems it introduces are precisely my point.

Consider three English words that have survived over the multiple centuries and their respective pronunciation in Old English (OE), Middle English around the vowel shift (MidE) and modern English, using the IPA: «knight», «through» and «daughter»:

«knight»: [knixt] or [kniçt] (OE) ↝ kniçt] or [knixt] (MidE) ↝ [naɪt] (E) «through»: [θurx] (OE) ↝ [θruːx] or [θruɣ] (MidE) ↝ [θruː] (E) «daughter»: [ˈdoxtor] (OE) ↝ [ˈdɔuxtər] or [ˈdauxtər] (MidE) ↝ [ˈdɔːtə] (E)

It is not possible for a modern English speaker to collate [knixt] and [naɪt], [θurx] and [θruː], [ˈdoxtor] and [ˈdɔːtə] as the same word in each case.

Regular re-spelling results in a loss of the linguistic continuity, and particularly so over a span of a few or more centuries.
by hysan | 2025-06-05 05:41:48+00:00
Have they managed to fix the bug where applying changes to a file moves the file to the first in your list of open files? And even pinning it if you have other files pinned? Overall, while I've liked using Cursor, it has many bugs like this that I haven't experienced in other VSCode forks and makes me wonder what they consider to be 1.0 quality.
by int_19h | 2025-06-05 05:41:59+00:00
English is rather complex phonologically. Lots of vowels for starters, and if we're talking about American English these include the rather rare R-colored vowels - but even without them things are pretty crowded, e.g. /æ/ vs /ɑ/ vs /ʌ/ ("cat" vs "cart" vs "cut") is just one big WTF to anyone whose language has a single "a-like" phoneme, which is most of them. Consonants have some weirdness as well - e.g. a retroflex approximant for a primary rhotic is fairly rare, and pervasive non-sibilant coronals ("th") are also somewhat unusual.

There are certainly languages with even more spoken complexity - e.g. 4+ consonant clusters like "vzdr" typical of Slavic - but even so spoken English is not that easy to learn to understand, and very hard to learn to speak without a noticeable accent.
by natrius | 2025-06-05 05:42:35+00:00
Most poor people rent. They are already forced to move when the land they live on gets more valuable and they can't afford the new lease. Taxing land redirects part of the rent they already pay to serve their interests (assuming good government).

Land value taxes are politically impossible in America, so there's no need to make the people who like LVT look bad. We already look bad!
by jjk166 | 2025-06-05 05:42:52+00:00
> plenty of people are going to be inconvenienced when one is chosen as the cable to rule them all, but in the end everyone wins

That's not everyone wins. The people that actually bought these devices now have cables that don't work and need to replace with a lower quality product, and the people who were already using something else are continuing to not need cables for these devices. The majority breaks even, a significant minority loses.

Simply not choosing one cable to rule them all lets everyone win. There is no compelling reason for one size to fit all.
by genewitch | 2025-06-05 05:43:23+00:00
Deepseek isn't good enough? You need a beefy GPU cluster but I bet it would be fine until the large llama is better at coding, and I'm certain there will be other large models for LLM. Now if there's some new technology around the corner, someone might be able to build a moat, but in a surprising twist, Facebook did us all a favor by releasing their weights back when; there's no moat possible, in my estimation, with LLMs as it stands today. Not even "multi-model" implementations. Which I have at home, too.

Say oai implements something that makes their service 2x better. Just using it for a while should give people who live and breathe this stuff enough information to tease out how to implement something like it, and eventually it'll make it into the local-only applications, and models.
by mg | 2025-06-05 05:43:58+00:00
I have yet to see a description of consciousness that is testable and is expected to be unreachable by machines.

Every time I have this discussion, it goes something like this:

A friend: ... says something about consciousness ...

Me: What is consciousness?

Friend: The awareness of one's own internal state.

Me: Like when my computer tells me how much free RAM it has?

Friend: No, more complex.

Me: So complex pieces of software are conscious?

Friend: No, they don't have emotions.

Me: What are emotions?

Friend: Being drawn to or away from something.

Me: Like how my computer prefers to have the screen saver on when possible?

Friend: No, more complex.

Me: So a more complex screen saver would have emotions and consciousness?

And on and on it goes...
by drdeca | 2025-06-05 05:45:39+00:00
I described fitness of genes, yes. Previously it seemed like you were saying that an individual of a species had low(zero) fitness if that individual doesn’t reproduce. Further, you seemed to imply that this was the relevant measure, seemingly to say so as a counterpoint to the point that an individual can act in a way that helps to propagate genes that that individual carries without actually reproducing.

It appears that some miscommunication occurred, which may have been me being dense or misinterpreting. Do you know where this miscommunication occurred?
by eru | 2025-06-05 05:45:56+00:00
> Any taxation based on unrealised gains/value is regressive, because it will be levied against people who may not have the income to support the taxation.

You can borrow against unrealised gains. That's a key part of the 'buy, borrow, die' tax strategy.

People who sit on hugely appreciated land ain't 'poor'.

> Proponents of LVT really hate poor and retired people, and tend to make up reams of excuses when this is put to them.

Haha, right.
by hysan | 2025-06-05 05:46:26+00:00
How well does this (e.g., Tauri) perform on Linux? When I last looked at it, the WebKit implementation is uses performed very poorly to the point where it was a deal breaker. I remember there was some talk of switching the implementation to something else, but I haven't followed it since I abandoned the idea of using Tauri for my toy projects.
by NitpickLawyer | 2025-06-05 05:46:47+00:00
> Since when the ability to write proper and meaningful sentences became engineering?

Since what's proper and meaningful depends on a lot of variables. Testing these, keeping track of them, logging and versioning take it from "vibe prompting" to "prompt engineering" IMO.

There are plenty of papers detailing this work. Some things work better than others (do this and this works better than don't do this - pink elephants thing). Structuring is important. Style is important. Order of information is important. Re-stating the problem is important.

Then there's quirks with family models. If you're running an API-served model you need internal checks to make sure the new version still behaves well on your prompts. These checks and tests are "prompt engineering".

I feel a lot of people take the knee-jerk reaction to the hype and miss critical aspects because they want to dunk on the hype.
by WarOnPrivacy | 2025-06-05 05:47:26+00:00
> Back in the 1980s and 90s I had lots of phone numbers memorized,

> now I don’t even know my wife’s phone number.

I think this is all of us who were born before the Reagan admin.

For my part, I combined both things you brought up. I have 10 numbers that are ~same as the ones I grew up with and they forward to the family phones (50¢ea/mo, MVNO)
by troad | 2025-06-05 05:47:58+00:00
I think the evolution of C# beyond Microsoft is overplayed. The entire tooling around the language remains a Microsoft product, with all the attendant Microsoft nonsense. It has opt out telemetry, even on Linux, and like every other MS product is currently having AI force-fed down its throat. It's only a matter of time until a compiler update automatically uploads all your code to Microsoft Azure Recall .net Passport Hotmail ft. the Copilot dancers.

If you're developing Windows apps or Windows games, C# is a fine choice; much as Swift is a fine choice for Apple apps. But no one worried about Apple's control of Swift should be pointing people to C# with a straight face.
by veqq | 2025-06-05 05:48:20+00:00
> Serbian, Croatian and Bosnian

are based on the exact same Štokavian dialect, ignoring Kajkavian, Čajkavian, Čakavian and Torlakian dialects. There is _no_ difference in standard orthography, because yat reflexes have nothing to do with national boundaries. Plenty of Serbs speak Ijekavian, for example. Here is a dialect map: https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2Fc...

Your example is literally arguing that Australian English should have the same _phonetic_ orthography, even. But Australian English must have the same orthography or else Australia will no longer speak English in 2-3 generations. The difference between Australian and American English is far larger than between modern varieties of naš jezik. Australians code switches talking to foreigners while Serbs and Croats do not.