MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by hoistbypetard | 2025-06-22 19:49:46+00:00
Do you use Bitwarden with it, by any chance? I daily drove it for quite a while, about mid 2022-late 2023. Poor bitwarden support plus a pile of paper cuts drove me away. When it worked as intended, I liked it, and I'm not opposed to paying for a good browser, but it was too buggy at that time for a subscription to feel like a good deal.
by bas_sen | 2025-06-22 19:49:47+00:00
Thanks for this, genuinely one of the most helpful comments I've gotten so far.

You totally nailed a few things I’ve been thinking through:

I do want to strike a better balance between fun/pop content and deeper, weirder, more esoteric rabbit holes.

The homepage might be too overwhelming or “shallow” feeling. I’ll experiment with highlighting fewer, deeper themes first.

And I love the Substack-style idea. I’ve actually started writing mini-intros for editor's selected rabbit holes, and I think a “Weekly Deep Dive” feature would be a great way to make the curation feel more personal and deliberate.

Really appreciate the thoughtful feedback, this is exactly the kind of thing that helps me improve.
by 8note | 2025-06-22 19:49:52+00:00
israel could also end it at any point, by not shooting, or by dissolving the whole state.

why do they not do this? israel has had the ability to end the war since before its inception.

the answer to why is no surprise, the same as hamas' reason to not surrender. the israeli goal is the disappearance of all palestinians, and hamas so happens to be made up of palestinians.
by wswope | 2025-06-22 19:50:19+00:00
I think you’ll be pleasantly surprised: There was an awkward transition post-Tony, but the new hosts have finally hit their stride.

Natalie/Gus/Hilde are far more serene presences than Tony, but they let the rest of the cast shine through. Helen and Derek in particular are the standout presenters right now, and while they don’t have the same manic/ADHD vibe, they’re both passionate and curious in a way that reflects Tony’s style and keeps the narrative intriguing.
by maqp | 2025-06-22 19:50:19+00:00
From the SimpleX doc you linked

"To mitigate this problem SimpleX Messaging Protocol servers support 2-hop onion message routing when the SMP server chosen by the sender forwards the messages to the servers chosen by the recipients, thus protecting both the senders IP addresses and sessions, even if connection isolation and Tor are not used."

The thing is, like I said, there are only two main companies running all the servers. Akamai and RunOnFlux. So unless Tor is used, it's a 50-50 chance that both users are connecting on to servers run by Akamai. Doesn't matter if the two servers don't share with each other the information about the IP-adderss of the user's peer. It's enough the parent VPS company has access to all traffic coming into the infrastructure. There's nothing "onion" about that routing. It's much closer to just traffic between two nodes of a server farm. Which is what practically any scalable IM server does.
by lotyrin | 2025-06-22 19:50:21+00:00
I was thinking "wow, how do you do that?" but then I forgot you're not dealing with any possible value between 1 and 2048 in a cell, only the powers of 2, so significantly fewer possible board states. Very cool.

I feel people often miss opportunities to map between (potentially complex, high entropy) state spaces into simple linear sequences of possible states and then either use those sequences to store the complex state data as a simple number or use the state of a system to encode data of some kind.

Like, if you use a limited 7-bit character set encoding for text and map that to a number in a sequence of possible orderings of a deck of 52 cards, you can store 32 characters (conveniently sized for passwords you might not want people to know are passwords).
by rafterydj | 2025-06-22 19:50:40+00:00
"flippantly tossing words around devalues them and debases the conversation." Agreed- and that's exactly what you are doing with the word, "no."

Soldiers are murdering an entire population- or as many of them as they can, seemingly- for political purposes that desire that population to simply not exist anymore. To say that is _not_ a genocide devalues the meaning of the word.
by kelseyfrog | 2025-06-22 19:51:04+00:00
> And - as wonderfully remarkable as such a system might be - it would, for our investigation, be neither appropriate nor fair to overburden AGI by an operational definition whose implicit metaphysics and its latent ontological worldviews lead to the epistemology of what we might call a “total isomorphic a priori” that produces an algorithmic world-formula that is identical with the world itself (which would then make the world an ontological algorithm...?).

> Anyway, this is not part of the questions this paper seeks to answer. Neither will we wonder in what way it could make sense to measure the strength of a model by its ability to find its relative position to the object it models. Instead, we chose to stay ignorant - or agnostic? - and take this fallible system called "human". As a point of reference.

Cowards.

That's the main counter argument and acknowledging its existence without addressing it is a craven dodge.

Assuming the assumptions[1] are true, then human intelligence isn't even able to be formalized under the same pretext.

Either human intelligence isn't

1. Algorithmic. The main point of contention. If humans aren't algorithmically reducible - even at the level computation of physics, then human cognition is supernatural.

2. Autonomous. Trivially true given that humans are the baseline.

3. Comprehensive (general): Trivially true since humans are the baseline.

4. Competent: Trivially true given humans are the baseline.

I'm not sure how they reconcile this given that they simply dodge the consequences that it implies.

Overall, not a great paper. It's much more likely that their formalism is wrong than their conclusion.

Footnotes

1. not even the consequences, unfortunately for the authors.
by hoistbypetard | 2025-06-22 19:51:29+00:00
They started peddling an AI assistant a while back:

https://help.kagi.com/kagi/ai/assistant.html

I don't think I'd have called them an AI company on that basis any more than I'd call JetBrains an AI company for the same reason. But I can see why someone might call them that.
by sir0010010 | 2025-06-22 19:51:58+00:00
"If you want to blame the government for something..."

* 88% of California jurisdictions have a minimum lot size of 5,000 sq ft or more

* Prior to 2024, jurisdictions in California required a minimum of two spots per single family home, or one to two spots per unit in a multifamily. California created a law to address this in 2024, but jurisdictions in most states still have similar requirements.

* Most jurisdictions in the US have restrictions around density - many only allowing single family homes or strictly limiting the number of multifamily units.

Other countries, including Australia, have similar restrictions. Google says the cost of adding central AC to a home is between $7k and $12k, so likely not a primary driver of the increase in cost of housing. "Multiple TVs" are definitely not a significant driver in increased housing costs.
by the__alchemist | 2025-06-22 19:52:11+00:00
I have an STM32 rust project I've been working on this week. It talks to an ESP using protobuf/RPC.

I'm doing it bare-metal/no allocator, as I do most embedded projects... and it's flirting with running me out of memory! What do most (and the most popular) protobuf libs do in rust? Use an allocator. What does the ESP itself do? Use an allocator (with FreeRTOS).

Meanwhile I'm using Heapless (Vec and String syntax with a statically-allocated array), on a MCU with 128K flash and 32K Ram... This won't end well.
Show HN: Cadence Sync – Run to any song, at your perfect pace
by EddieLomax | 2025-06-22 19:52:27+00:00
I love running to music but most songs are always just slightly too slow or too fast. Finding one that matches your exact cadence always feels awesome, and I thought-- there should be an app for that. So this is an attempt to make that happen for any song you have. Still ironing out some kinks here and there, but seems to work pretty well. TestFlight build available if you want to give it a shot.
by theletterf | 2025-06-22 19:52:56+00:00
The posts has a promising start, then abruptly ends.

Yes, developers need to improve writing skills. A good book on the matter is Chris Ward's Technical Writing for Software Developers, which I reviewed here: https://passo.uno/review-technical-writing-software-develope...

They also need to hire technical writers. Did the author know they exist?
by voidhorse | 2025-06-22 19:53:03+00:00
Sure, here are some of my favorites:

Faulkner, Thomas Bernhard, John Barth, Henry James, Herman Melville, Fleur Jaeggy, Dostoyevsky, Marguerite Duras, Poe, Hawthorne, Rosemarie Waldrop, Kraznahokai,

These are just a couple that came to mind. Among them, probably Waldrop, Jaeggy, and Bernhard are the most experimental, but I would argue that none of them aesthetically speaking write books that are simple, and I don't think I could argue that any of them should have simplified their themes or style or general employment of language to be more accessible.

Kraznahorkai and Bernhard are great examples. Are walls of text without paragraph breaks harder to read? Yes. But this is an important aesthetic choice. In both cases (all of bernard, melancholy of resistance for Kraz) it speaks to an overbearing oppressiveness that ties directly into their thematics. If you missed this I think you missed out an essential point of their aesthetic and what they were trying to say. We cannot sever form and content. This is why I think it's absurd to complain that someone's work is "not accessible" —its really silly to demand any sort of aesthetic capitulation on the part of any artist, literary or otherwise, in the first place.

Edit: Faulkner is another good example that's less experimental. I'm sure some readers would have found As I lay Dying or The Sound and the Fury more accessible if a narrator mediated between the various first person voices he presents, but this would so drastically change the aesthetic character of these works that I doubt you'd be able to claim they aren't essentially different and would not be equivalent pieces of art.
by hiAndrewQuinn | 2025-06-22 19:54:38+00:00
In Crime and Punishment: An Economic Approach, Nobel Prize-winning economist Gary Becker showed crime can be discouraged if the expected punishment outweighs the reward. Expected punishment has not one, but two important factors: How big the punishment is, and how likely the punishment is to actually be levied.

Punishment likelihood depends on how likely the crime is to be detected in the first place. Older societies such as medieval Europe or Qing dynasty era China used the death penalty for so many seemingly minor things, and this formula was a big part of why. State authorities at that period of human history had a very low chance of actually detecting something like forgery. So in order to deter criminals they had to ratchet up just how big the potential punishment actually was if you did get caught.

Conversely, as our societies have improved their ability to detect crimes, our stomach for policies like “Forgery is punishable by death” has rightfully taken a nosedive. So, yes, the trend I've seen across the centuries suggests to me I might well prefer to live in a society where the detection rate is higher than it currently is. There's no reason to suspect we've hit upon the optimal point for human flourishing where we are now.
by fc417fc802 | 2025-06-22 19:55:08+00:00
I actually did answer your question about salmonella.

> and, in a vacuum of any relevant information

The context was your original reply rebutting the suggestion that this is corporate propaganda. Yet you play dumb and pretend that doesn't exist.

Rooting your phone can void your warranty and pose a security risk in precisely the same way that servicing your own car can. If we were on an automotive forum and you replied with that I would also accuse you of spreading FUD.

Something being true when interpreted in a literal sense does not make the commonly perceived meaning true. Willfully ignoring that is where the bad faith element lies. Well that and the part where you've been repeatedly playing dumb for the perception of winning an argument.
by 827a | 2025-06-22 19:55:42+00:00
> Nuclear non-proliferation was based on the idea that small countries didn't need their own nuclear weapons, because they could ally with a superpower / bloc with nuclear weapons

There are dozens of examples of denuclearized countries that are, today, at near-zero risk of being attacked or invaded, possibly because of their political and economic relationship with the United States. Taiwan, Japan, Poland, Canada, Spain, Australia, many others, these are all countries that do not have nukes, have a great political and economic relationship with the US, and are currently at 0% risk of attack or invasion by our shared enemies (ok, you can put Taiwan at slightly higher than 0%).

Ukraine never had this kind of relationship. They tried to play both sides with their denuclearization agreement; that's what screwed them. Other countries picked a side when they denuclearized.

Statistically: There are, I believe, zero examples of a US political or economic ally being attacked or invaded, regardless of their nuclearization status, post-Vietnam. The only example of anyone who is remotely close to this is Taiwan, and even that's very far away from igniting.
by int_19h | 2025-06-22 19:56:39+00:00
We need unions, for starters. And not the small kind that is scoped to one employer, but large industrial unions that can deliver large losses to the capital through massive strikes.

The irony is that the easiest time to establish those was back when software developer jobs were abundant and we had a stronger position wrt employers. But, of course, back then most devs not only didn't see the point of a union, but were actively hostile to the idea. Now that employers have a much stronger upper hand and are flexing their muscle with layoffs etc the idea is suddenly much more palatable to many, but it's also much harder to get going because of the risks involved. But the longer we sit and wait, the more code is written by the robots without human involvement, and the less powerful such a union would be.
Show HN: rtrvr.ai – New Free SOTA AI Web Agent Beats Even Operator
by arjunchint | 2025-06-22 19:57:01+00:00
We just benchmarked our agent, rtrvr.ai, on the Halluminate (YC S25) Web Bench, and rtrvr.ai achieved a new State-of-the-Art performance with an 81% success rate. For perspective, this surpasses not only all other autonomous agents but also the human-intervention baseline of OpenAI's Operator (76.5%).

It also completes tasks an astonishing 7x faster than the next leading alternative.

This isn't just an incremental improvement; it's a validation of our core architectural philosophy. Our performance stems from two key differentiators:

- Local-First Operation: As a Chrome Extension, rtrvr.ai operates directly within the user's browser. This eliminates the latency, bot detection and access issues that plague cloud browser agents.

- DOM-Based Interaction: Instead of relying on brittle visual parsing (CUA), our agent interacts directly with the page's HTML structure, enabling skipping clicks and resilience to pop-ups and overlays. We also can just use the latest and fastest models such as Gemini Flash for superior performance.

This leads to a critical industry insight: Cloud Browser Agents are not a viable long-term solution for reliable web automation.

Our benchmark analysis shows that over 94% of rtrvr.ai's failures were "agent errors" (fixable AI logic), while only 5% were "infrastructure errors." For cloud agents, this ratio is often inverted. You can't build a reliable agent if you can't even guarantee access to the environment.

Finally it only cost us ~$40 to run this benchmark, whereas we estimate it cost >~$1k in infra costs for each agent for Halluminate.

The future of web automation won't be fought from remote data centers. It will be run symbiotically from your browser. Our results are the first major data point proving this thesis and putting the first nail in the coffin for cloud browser agents.

Full Report: https://www.rtrvr.ai/blog/web-bench-results

Or if you just want to tune into some Agentic-SMR of a web agent doing tasks online tune into the playlist: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HWPZI8PjuLY&list=PL5rk1YARPB...

Try out the magic of a working web agent yourself, install at: https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/rtrvrai-ai-web-agen...

Bring your own API Key from ai.studio and use Google's Gemini Free Tier to use our web agent for free! We literally have a button that will get our agent to open AI Studio create key and configure itself all automatically.
by hiAndrewQuinn | 2025-06-22 19:57:19+00:00
This is why optimal policy design has the fines get paid directly from the violator to the reporter. That brings its own quirks, but they're all surprisingly tractable with other market mechanisms.

There's a whole literature on this topic in economics under mechanism design. They've been a longstanding research interest of mine, I consider it almost like the land value tax of legal enforcement by this point.
by maqp | 2025-06-22 19:57:42+00:00
The thing is, if there's three users that know each other, using one server run by one of the three, then by definition there is one person with access to metadata of the 1:1 conversation between the two other users. If you are the one running the server, then your buddies are taking the risk that you're the creepy buddy.

The proper way to address this is with p2p messaging, like Cwtch, where each user is running server for their own account. Cwtch also experimentally supports caching ciphertexts on a server that's hosting the group chats that all members will have access to anyway, so there's no peer metadata to eavesdrop on.
by johnnyanmac | 2025-06-22 19:58:44+00:00
Now when I graduated in 2017, I simply go in expecting over half my applications to be ignored or get a generic rejection. That's just the way it was, even in a "hot market". I fortunately didn't struggle too much to get my first job. It took 100 applications but I was getting interviews at maybe a 10% rate. I wasn't a great student so I didn't have those cray stories about managing 3 offers from top companies. But I still made do.

The market today is completely different, in the worst way possible.
by Qem | 2025-06-22 19:59:28+00:00
> Amnesty international emitted report that say "Israel is not commiting genocide according to existing definitions, thus definitions should be changed"

Source? Perhaps older report, before the country dropped any pretense of respecting international norms on human rights. Today Amnesty sees a clear case of genocide underway against indigenous palestinians in Gaza. See https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2024/12/amnesty-inter...
by kassner | 2025-06-22 19:59:35+00:00
My findings:

> I’ve tested Delta Chat with my own mail server, which uses Postfix and has everything configured for public e-mail, like DKIM signing, spamd, IP blocklist checks and so on, and each message took about 2 seconds from one device to another. Using a public server it sure feels below 300ms, so there is room for improvement when self-hosting a dedicated chatserver.

https://www.kassner.com.br/en/2025/05/08/delta-chat-encrypte...

In my test, both clients were ~80ms away from the IMAP server, but the server was delivering to itself. I’m also not sure if the port 587 has an idle/keepalive mechanism, or if it has to go around the entire TLS handshake at each message.

I don’t think 2 seconds is bad, most of my contacts will take at least triple that to read and type in an answer, so not a big deal.
by bigstrat2003 | 2025-06-22 19:59:51+00:00
I would not say that the value of art is strictly equivalent to technical difficulty. But I would say that there is a level of technical competence required for art to be good. Something that takes no skill to create (e.g. that absurd banana duct taped to a wall "piece") is not good art, if indeed it can be called art at all.
by adrian17 | 2025-06-22 20:00:05+00:00
As for syntax, note that as the author says:

> I do not have access yet to a true C++26 compiler. When C++26 arrive, we will have features such as ‘template for’ which are like ‘for’ loops, but for template metaprogramming. Meanwhile, I use a somewhat obscure ‘expand’ syntax.

In particular, regarding the most cryptic line:

[:expand(nonstatic_data_members_of(^^T, ctx)):] >> [&]<auto member>{

In fact, at least from what I know, `expand()` and this fancy use of `>>` aren't actually part of the standard (the standard proposal uses them as an temporary example in case other features didn't get in). The equivalent (I think) line with the C++26 approved features would be a bit more friendly:

template for (constexpr auto member : nonstatic_data_members_of(^^T, ctx)) {

So while it's still not the prettiest thing in the world and knowing C++, it surely will produce some eldritch metaprogramming abominations, the author's examples made it look slightly uglier than it actually is.
by theGeatZhopa | 2025-06-22 20:00:53+00:00
That's cool, but I somehow have the feeling it's a click bait title. Reading the linked, it starts saying bla bla navigation bla bla gps free... And then quickly advance to the point of measurements of anomalies in magnetic fields and ore detection and underwater navigation through (existing) maps of magnetic fields. But, in my eyes, the main focus was clearly put on detection of minerals/ore and unexploded ordnance in soil in the very last paragraph.

otherwise, top news. Such device is indeed a very very useful in terms of searching of mines and bombs and minerals and such. And for sure might revolutionize the stupid detection devices for finding cables and pipes in buildings, finally.
by cmurf | 2025-06-22 20:01:29+00:00
Illegal war started by a man constitutionally ineligible to be president.

The only reason why he ran for office was to keep himself out of prison.

John Adams said the Constitution is intended for a moral (virtuous) people. Meaning, it isn't self executing. You need people willing to commit to its guidance. And yet just enough of the people gave consent to be governed to a man who sent a mob to assassinate the vice-president of the U.S. when that VPOTUS, Mike Pence, refused Trump's order to overturn an election that Trump had lost.

How can corruption of this magnitude be described as virtuous?
by int_19h | 2025-06-22 20:02:07+00:00
Don't worry, local models past a certain size will be declared illegal eventually on the grounds of safety. You can already see the major players advocating for legislation that is a step down that road.

And this wouldn't even be very difficult to enforce. Running SOTA models at useful speeds (which you'd need to actually compete - a local setup like you describe where time to first token is measured in minutes for a decent sized prompt is not going to cut it) requires a lot of compute. Which is to say, hardware, and energy to power it. Both things that can be tracked.
by johnnyanmac | 2025-06-22 20:02:11+00:00
>Who is even hiring juniors except those with impressive projects, from prestigious colleges or with at least 2-3 years of experience?

Even those students are sfruggling: https://www.businessinsider.com/tech-degrees-job-berkeley-pr...

https://www.forbes.com/sites/chriswestfall/2025/01/15/when-h...

I do think the market will eventually bounce back. But it's a bloodbath out there right now.