MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by mardifoufs | 2025-06-08 00:25:31+00:00
France usually has its own domestic alternatives for a lot of stuff. Even online. It's becoming less and less true (for example, instagram or tiktok are just as common there than anywhere else) though. So it could make sense to think that France would be a smaller market for PH than Germany or the UK.

I know Germany is similar to France in that regard, but I'm more familiar with France. And it also has a bigger population!
by busyant | 2025-06-08 00:25:31+00:00
I had a history prof who said "Communism is for the angels. But the angels don't need it."

That being said, I don't fully agree with grandparent's statement that ...

> We have some other kind of "ocracy": government by the lucky.

As much as it pains me to say it, it wasn't just "luck."

Musk is reasonably bright and Trump is ... well ... he's not as dumb as many portray him.

Instead they're both horribly broken in other ways.

Trump seems devoid of empathy and that metaphorical vacuum is filled with malevolence. He also appears to have very little self-control.

I can't tell you what is broken with Musk. Maybe the same stuff as w/ Trump, but to a slightly lesser degree.

Luck certainly played a part in their respective successes, but so did intelligence and ruthlessness.
by mjbamford | 2025-06-08 00:25:57+00:00
I never met Bill, and he never knew I existed, but he has had such a huge impact on my career, my family and my prosperity. I started my programming passion on the Apple II and switch to the Mac in 1984 after seeing MacPaint. Hypercard was very impactful on my logical thinking, paraded the incredibility of possibilities from this machine, and taught me how to conceptualise information. His humble efforts have had such a profound affect. I'm so very full of grief upon hearing this news.
by bluGill | 2025-06-08 00:27:09+00:00
There is corruption everywhere. If there is a short list that means that the truth is being hid, or your have way too much police (often both).

As you state, the size of the iceberg cannot be understood by what we can easially observe. While there is corruption in the US, it isn't really much worse than other places that are not known for corruption - though understand that the US has a lot higher population and so it might seem that way. (though often those other places are just hiding truth)
by bn-l | 2025-06-08 00:27:13+00:00
Hey it’s ok to be confused. This week we stop hating musk (but trump is still a baddie).

You’re allowed to make comments like this where you express joy at watching his suffering: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44196058. but only for another week.

In 20 days musk will be a goodie and then you mustn’t at all say anything negative at all about him. He’s a goodie. Again, trump is a baddie (baddie status began in 2016 fyi, before that point he was a goodie).
by kesor | 2025-06-08 00:28:08+00:00
Creating overlays on nixpkgs is fairly trivial. There was a bug a couple of weeks ago with yt-dlp, which was fixed in the nightly version. But even today the new version is not yet available in nixpkgs-unstable. Did I wait all this time with a broken yt-dlp? No! I created a derivation that overrides the git commit of the original yt-dlp, and added it as an overlay to nixpkgs. Once nixpkgs has the newer version, I'll remove the overlay and customized derivation. This is a 5-lines-of-code change. You don't have to use flakes if you don't want to, it works without flakes as well.

Now compare the above with how you would customize a version in other systems, like Debian with apt-pkgs ...
by rezmason | 2025-06-08 00:28:08+00:00
> I have been kicking myself for some time not just chatting with him about ... whatever.

Maybe I should show some initiative! See, for a little while now I've wanted to just chat with you about whatever.

At this moment I'm working on a little research project about the advent of color on the Macintosh, specifically the color picker. Would you be interested in a casual convo that touches on that? If so, I can create a BlueSky account and reach out to you over there. :)

https://merveilles.town/deck/@rezmason/114586460712518867
by oefrha | 2025-06-08 00:28:17+00:00
Safari is the new IE not because they refuse to implement questionable new web “standards”, but because

- It has all sorts of random quirks in their supposedly supported features;

- Mobile Safari has even more quirks;

- No other major browser introduces random serious bugs like Safari does (remember the IndexedDB one?);

- Version updates are tied to OS updates meaning it’s the only major browsers that’s not evergreen, and coupled with the previous points you have to carry workarounds for bugs forever, and of course can’t use new features;

- Extensions are 10x harder to develop and more than 10x more expensive to publish since they’re tied to Xcode, Apple Developer Program and MAS, because fuck you;

- Like another commenter said, it’s the only browser that crashes on me (random “this page has experienced a problem and reloaded” or something like that);

- PWA is another kind of hell in Safari but opinions are divided so whatever. At the very least it’s not conducive to an open web.

It’s a piece of hot garbage, like a lot of other Apple software these days. Sure, maybe it’s battery efficient or something. I don’t give a shit because I work plugged in.

Oh and developer tools in Safari are crap but who cares.
by mrbungie | 2025-06-08 00:29:17+00:00
> The issue is people who say "see, the AI makes mistakes at very complex reasoning problems, so their 'thinking is an illusion'". That's the title of the paper.

That's not what the paper proposes (i.e. it commits errors => thinking is an illusion). It in fact looks at the failures modes and then it argues that due to HOW they fail and in which contexts/conditions, that their thinking may be "illusory" (not that the word illusory matters that much, papers of this calibre always strive for interesting sounding titles). Hell, they even gave the exact algo to the LRM, it probably can't get more enabling than that.

Humans are lossy thinkers and error-prone biological "machines", but an educated+aligned+incentivized one shouldn't have problems following complex instructions/algos (not in a no-errors way, but rather, in a self-correcting way); we thought that LRMs did that too, but the paper shows how they even start using less "thinking" tokens after a complexity threshold and that's terribly worrisome, akin to someone getting frustrated and stopping thinking after a problem gets too difficult which goes contrary to the idea that these machines can run laboratories by themselves. It is not the last nail in the coffin because more evidence is needed as always, but when taken into account with other papers, it points towards the limitations of LLMs/LRMs and how those limitations may not be solvable with more compute/tokens, but rather exploring new paradigms (long due in my opinion, the industry usually forces a paradigm as panacea during hype cicles in the name of hypergrowth/sales).

In short the argument you say the paper and posters ITT make is very different from what they are actually saying, so beware of the logical leap you are making.

> There is this armchair philosophical idea, that a human can simulate any turning machine and thus our reasoning is "maxomally general", and anything that can't do this is not general intelligence. But this is the complete opposite of reality. In our world, anything we know that can perfectly simulate a turning machine is not general intelligence, and vice versa.

That's typical goalpoast moving and happens in both ways when talking about "general intelligence" as you say, since the dawn of AI and the first neural networks. I'm not following why this is relevant for the discussion though.
by nobody9999 | 2025-06-08 00:29:29+00:00
I respect that view. And I think you (and anyone else who shares that view) should be able to access any legal content, should they wish to do so.

That said, what does what you or I think have to do with YouTube's policies?

If you disagree with some or all of their policies (I certainly do), you are free not to use YouTube.

I tend not to use that site because I don't like ads and I don't like being spied upon.

No one is stopping you or anyone else from creating a platform for the topic(s) you'd like to see disseminated and discussed.

Or is it (and I'm not saying it is) your contention that YouTube should be required to provide both hosting and ad monetization to everyone, without regard to the content of those hosted videos?
by Braxton1980 | 2025-06-08 00:30:38+00:00
2020 - Trump goes after tiktok https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-07-31/trump-to-...

In 2024 two bills (merged later) went through the Republican controlled House with a bipartisan vote (350+ for) [1] then the Democrat controlled Senate [2] with another bipartisan vote (79-18, attached to an Israeli funding bill) basically following whatTrump wanted.

Late 2024 - Trump then offered to save the service when the Public turned against the ban and used it as a campaign item.

2025 - His supporters were all over Tiktok praising him, including the CEO of Tiktok when he put a pause on the required sale. He's also extended the deadline multiple times now.

----------------------------

Republicans might start using this tactic more now that it's been shown to work. It's similar to the "Fuck the next admin" tax bill that he put in his first term.

[1] https://www.reuters.com/technology/us-house-vote-force-byted... [2] https://apnews.com/article/tiktok-ban-congress-bill-1c48466d...
by bluGill | 2025-06-08 00:31:31+00:00
Maybe. There are pros and cons. Docker means you can run two+ different things on the same machine and update them separately. This is sometimes important when one project releases a feature you really want, while a different one just did a major update that broke something you care about. Running on the OS often means you have to update both.

Single binary sometimes works, but means you need more memory and disk space. (granted much less a concern today than it was back in 1996 when I first started self hosting, but it still can be an issue)
by askvictor | 2025-06-08 00:31:38+00:00
> A bus only lane is also a vehicle lane that is sitting empty a good part of the time.

You can make the same argument (in terms of space) about a train track. The real advantage of trains (light or heavy) is permanence. It's easy for the next government to remove the bus lanes because "OMG too much traffic, one more lane will fix it." It's much more difficult to rip out a rail line and convert it to a road.
by shakna | 2025-06-08 00:31:44+00:00
It returns a new pointer, with the same buffer, as I said already. "There's a different length marked along with the pointer, but that's it."

You need a slice, which has a different length. That is how you do it, without a new allocation.

It's effectively:

struct String { size_t length; char\* buffer }; struct String\* Unbounded_Slice(struct String\* original, size_t Low, size_t High) { struct String\* slice = malloc(sizeof(struct String)); // Bounds checking would go here... slice->buffer = original + Low; slice->length = High; return slice; }

(The exact definition of a string is implementation-defined. But that's the concept.)

Ada enforces safe ranges, which means you need to carry the length of the slice somehow. It does not use C's 0-terminated strings. So slicing does not work the same way as strtok or other self-modifying systems - the length isn't guessed, it's known.

But if you change one character in the buffer of the slice, it'll be changed in the original Unbounded_String too.

For trimming whitespace, you're right that Unbounded's standard Trim may reallocate. It carries multiple buffers, and when you Trim sometimes it will just hand it back, other times it'll reallocate. [0] Mostly for performance tradeoff. Keeping the original can make iteration slower, as it holds multiple buffers.

So, to implement our own - with one caveat. Slice can't handle 0-length, because range safety is enforced. So in the case of a wholly whitespace string, we'll be doing a whole new allocation.

-- This line is just for pasting into godbolt pragma Source_File_Name (NTrim, Body_File_Name => "example.adb"); with Ada.Strings.Unbounded; with Ada.Strings.Maps; use Ada.Strings.Unbounded; function NTrim(Source : Unbounded_String) return Unbounded_String is Len : constant Natural := Length(Source); First, Last : Natural; Whitespace : constant Ada.Strings.Maps.Character_Set := Ada.Strings.Maps.To_Set(" " & ASCII.HT & ASCII.LF & ASCII.CR); begin if Len = 0 then return Source; end if; First := 1; while First <= Len and then Ada.Strings.Maps.Is_In(Element(Source, First), Whitespace) loop First := First + 1; end loop; Last := Len; while Last >= First and then Ada.Strings.Maps.Is_In(Element(Source, Last), Whitespace) loop Last := Last - 1; end loop; if First > Last then return To_Unbounded_String(""); end if; declare Trimmed_Length : constant Natural := Last - First + 1; begin if Trimmed_Length >= 3 then return Unbounded_Slice(Source, First, First + 2); else return Unbounded_Slice(Source, First, Last); end if; end; end NTrim;

The resulting compilation [1] has a few things. Our whitespace map gets allocated and deallocated most of the time. A map is harder to treat as a constant, and the compiler doesn't always optimise that nicely. Most of the code is bounds checking. No off-by-one allowed, here. Where first is greater than last, you get a new full allocation.

[0] https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc/blob/master/gcc/ada/libgna...

[1] https://godbolt.org/z/x8Erhqn5n
by int_19h | 2025-06-08 00:31:52+00:00
When taxes are paid on revenue rather than profits, the rate is obviously much lower, so that it would add up to roughly the same thing.

However, there are many benefits overall. For one, it completely kills off the various convoluted schemes to avoid classifying something that is obviously a profit as such (by shuffling things around subsidiaries etc, for example). See also: Hollywood accounting.
by YeGoblynQueenne | 2025-06-08 00:32:08+00:00
So you mean that Builder.ai is using more AI now than they used in 2019? In other words, more than "roughly 82%" of apps the company now develops is built "autonomously, in the first hour by Engineer.ai’s technology"?

Note that generative AI and LLMS like GPT, Elmo and BERT existed earlier than 2019 and were the subject of much research (see "BERTology").
by simoncion | 2025-06-08 00:32:34+00:00
> Most programmers do approximately zero work that is R&D.

So, what you're saying is one or more of the following:

1) The work of most programmers should not be considered R&D, and shouldn't be covered by tax schemes intended for R&D.

2) Most "software IP" in the industry is not the result of R&D.

3) You've rarely been involved in the sale of non-R&D "software IP". (Do recall that your original statement was "As anyone that has ever sold software IP knows, most of the value is vested in the person that wrote the code, not the code itself.")
by more_corn | 2025-06-08 00:32:42+00:00
Didn’t the Trump EPA roll back water quality rules for forever chemicals? Chemicals that accumulate over time and are known to cause organ failure?

If the federal rules allow unsafe levels of PFAs it’s reasonable to expect that municipal water companies adhere to said unsafe limits. So no we probably should not trust our municipal water supplies.

Maybe in countries that have functional governments that’s a safe bet.
by tyfighter | 2025-06-08 00:33:04+00:00
I don't know which strains credulity more:

1.) In the 1960s, the Air Force developed a top-secret device power enough to simulate the EMP of a nuclear blast, i.e. some form of Non-nuclear Electromagnetic Pulse device that wouldn't be developed into a weapon for a few more decades. Rather than a controlled scientific test, they then decided to secretly drive it up to an operating missile base. They proceed to set it up on a 60 foot tall portable stand without anyone at the site noticing. I guess people at the site had their AirPods in for hours while giant generators run to charge the banks of capacitors necessary to run something that huge. No one noticed anything of this happening until it was hovering over the gate, they had their rifles pointed at it, and the mad scientists behind this plan were justified in their fear that our missile launch facilities were vulnerable to EMP.

2.) In the 1960s, a UFO disabled a missile at a launch facility.
by cardanome | 2025-06-08 00:33:37+00:00
I am sorry but the reality is that most people in this world do not have any executive dysfunction. They can just do things.

They often do not want to do things. They will often choose to do the easy or more pleasant task but they do not have the same struggle someone with ADHD has.

The world is not fair. Yes, you can still achieve your goals with ADHD but you will have to go about it differently. The first step is in accepting yourself and leaning into your strengths and weaknesses.
by bluGill | 2025-06-08 00:34:24+00:00
They claim that, but everyone small I know who self hosted email has discovered that forms don't do anything. I switched to fastmail 15 years ago and my email got a lot better because they are big enough that nobody dares ignore them. (maybe the forms work better today than 15 years ago, but enough people keep complaining about this issue that I doubt it)
by justjake | 2025-06-08 00:35:54+00:00
Bingo. Nix doesn't give you a generalizable-across-languages-and-ecosystems way of specifying specific versions without blowing up your package size, unless you hand Nix to your users (which we didn't want to do)

Maybe we were holding it wrong, but, we ultimately made the call to move away for that reason (and more)
by dantodor | 2025-06-08 00:36:12+00:00
Have you ever tried to use it? Because I fought for about 2 months with both Google and Microsoft, trying to self-host my mail server, to no success. The only answer was amongst the lines 'your server has not enough reputation'. Even though perfectly configured, DKIM, DMARC, etc. Now imagine a business not being able to send a message to anyone hosted on Gmail or Outlook, probably 80-90 percents of the companies out there.
by mmooss | 2025-06-08 00:36:31+00:00
> A bus only lane is also a vehicle lane that is sitting empty a good part of the time.

A rail track for the same route sits empty just as much.

> you can add additional lanes almost indefinitely, and it doesn't really help congestion that much.

I don't think adding bus-only lanes would have that effect. Adding lanes for private vehicles reduces congestion, which encourages people to move to places along the route until the congestion reaches the previous barely-tolerable level (as I understand it).
by cycomanic | 2025-06-08 00:37:59+00:00
For the risk of feeding a troll:

>There are places in America that are among the most dangerous in the world. You go to places like Oakland. Or Ferguson. The crime numbers are worse. Seriously," and retweeted a false claim that 81% of white murder victims were killed by black people.

> "We've just seen many, many crimes getting worse all the time, and as Maine knows—a major destination for Somali refugees—right, am I right?"

Just 2 of them.
by jsnell | 2025-06-08 00:38:25+00:00
These things are tiny! I've traveled in larger airport shuttles.

It feels like that's putting this into a really awkward place in the tradeoff space. Trams work because they can scale higher than buses. That scale comes at the cost of more up-front infrastructure, much less flexibility, and needing dedicated lanes. So cities don't have trams everywhere, but they're only installed on routes that can support the scale.

For these you still have the up-front investment (just less of it) and inflexibility, but don't get the efficiencies of scale due to how small the capacity is.

Is this really just a bet that they can get autonomous tram-driving on city street approved a decade+ sooner than autonomous buses?
by j_bum | 2025-06-08 00:39:14+00:00
You had me up until your last clause…

If you understand that LSD doesn’t permanently alter the brain, why do you think PY “permanently” alters the brain? It does alter the brain (like LSD; see the plethora of research on PY altering neurogenesis and functional connectivity [0]), I’m unsure of what you mean by “permanent”.

[0] https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-024-07624-5
by Veedrac | 2025-06-08 00:39:19+00:00
This is one of these sets of information that don't seem to make sense until you fit it all together.

Busses aren't much more efficient when riding down a lane than lower occupancy vehicles, but streets aren't bottlenecked by their roads, they're bottlenecked by their intersections. The key advantage of a bus is at the intersection. A bus holds the intersection for far less time than the equivalent passenger capacity of cars.

The problem bus lanes try to solve is dominantly that without them the traffic advantage of people riding busses mostly goes to people not riding busses, and this makes for a pretty terrible incentive structure. Busses are intrinsically disadvantaged against cars (schedules, uncertainty, routes), so if you don't help them, then people will prefer to drive. Bus lanes internalize the externality.
by woke_ai_god | 2025-06-08 00:39:28+00:00
We know all of these tech CEO's were on group chats with each other planning for how to install Trump as monarch. I would think, if you had several billionaires and industry leaders all participating day in and day out in the same secret group chats with each other, it would not be that difficult for them to coordinate layoffs with each other. Turning it from competition against each other for labor, to a cartel which just attempts to break the labor supply.
by wat10000 | 2025-06-08 00:39:57+00:00
I checked and it seems like the reason for San Antonio was a mix of your view and mine (assuming we can believe the narrator here):

“At that time I got a look at the condition of San Antonio. I remember being astonished that this little city had been so terribly devastated on Warday. People had hardly even heard of it in Britain. One would have expected Los Angeles or even Houston before San Antonio. Of course, it has since come out that a good part of the planned Soviet attack didn't go off, so in a sense San Antonio was simply unlucky. The Soviets had given it first-strike priority because of the extensive U.S. Air Force repair and refitting facilities there, and the huge complex of military hospitals, the atomic supplies dump at Medina Base, and the presence of a mechanized army that could have been used to preserve order across the whole of the Southwest as well as seal the Mexican border.”

So the first strike was those three cities, and then the followup total strike didn’t happen, presumably stopped by the US counterstrike.

For Manhattan, it says that the biggest hazard is from chemical pollution from abandoned storage facilities, particularly nearby in New Jersey. Which seems kind of plausible, although I imagine people would be a lot more tolerant of such health hazards in this world. I guess everyone evacuated, and then the fact that you can’t just walk back to Manhattan might keep people from returning.