MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by fellowniusmonk | 2025-06-22 00:53:24+00:00
The universe is full of RNG generators, until we find another entity with the structure requiried to make semantic assertion about the universe I'd say we shouldn't be too hasty in saying we aren't that important.

We take energy and spit out complex semantic meaning, there are huge structures that take in matter and spit out stars but how many places have structures that take inputs and spit out complex semantics? Not many that we've observed so far and those ones are kind of in a precarious situation.

We haven't fully explored physics yet, I'd say it's too early to call it at this point.

Casual chains are fragile, we should preserve the structures that enable the generation of complex semantic meaning.
by MarkMarine | 2025-06-22 00:53:26+00:00
This is astonishing. Our intelligence concluded Iran wasn’t moving towards a nuke and we hit them anyway, using peace negotiations as a ruse. No authorization from the representatives of the people who actually fight in the war, no thought of what this will do.

If the comparison with how we treat hostile forces with nuclear weapons wasn’t more stark. N. Korea is basically left alone, their leader praised. Libya gives up nukes and then the state falls in on itself.

This is proving to any state that nuclear arms are really the only protection. The world is less safe, and the next generation of young men like me (20 years ago) are about to be thrown into the meat grinder, sent by a ruling class that doesn’t even answer to the people anymore.

We’ve really lost our way.
by maqp | 2025-06-22 00:54:50+00:00
>Personally I just want to share shitposts with friends and speak freely without second guessing if I’m gonna be profiled by a data broker

You are welcome to live your privileged life with your privileged friends using any software you feel is good enough. Just don't assume everyone can afford that luxury.

https://pressgazette.co.uk/news/rsf-moves-downgrades-global-... is a decent index to assess in what kind of country you're living in.
by FridayoLeary | 2025-06-22 00:55:53+00:00
Their meddling directly contributed to the current disastrous war in Gaza and lebanon. They also helped prop up the Assad regime in Syria. All so they could threaten a country 700 miles away.

I expect you to deny or water down most of my claims, so to spare a long flamewar, just assume i've given all the generic standard responses everyone here has seen 100 times. I agree with most of them.

But what business is it of Iran whether or not israel exists? They don't seem to care about palestinians too much otherwise they wouldn't be supporting hamas and the war they started.

It's a genocidal regime, despised by most of her citizens. They fund proxy wars across the middle east based on religious extremism. They deserve everything they are getting and with all due respect only an idiot would support them.
by sjsdaiuasgdia | 2025-06-22 00:56:13+00:00
The point was to build trust that Iran would not continue to pursue nuclear weapons. The trust would be built through the multi-year partnership.

The position you're taking only really works if you start from "Iran will always work towards having a nuclear bomb, no matter what." And yeah, if that's your starting place, you've figured out where that path ends up. You're never going to be satisfied with anything Iran says because your fundamental premise is that they can't be trusted to not pursue a nuclear bomb.

By walking away from the deal, we gave Iran a clear message: "you might as well pursue a bomb because we are always going to act like you are, no matter what you actually do."
by YZF | 2025-06-22 00:56:46+00:00
Israel has been talking about the threat for some time and Iran over time has broadened its nuclear program and has enriched more and more Uranium to higher and higher levels.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_program_of_Iran#Secret...

Why does Iran need all this enriched Uranium? Why is it investing so much in this? Why does it invest so much in its ballistic missile program?

Would Israel be a threat to Iran if Iran didn't continuously declare it wants to wipe Israel off the map and take all these actions to follow up on that?

Israel is tiny. It can't afford the risk of a regime that openly declares it wants to wipe it off the map and has acted towards that goal to get nuclear missiles.
by avoutos | 2025-06-22 00:56:56+00:00
To say that Israel has fully captured the American government is ridiculous. Pro-Israel spending is a fraction of all political spending.

take aipac, which barely scratches the top 10 of single-issue focused organizations. Aipac donated 43 mil to campaigns in 2023-24. The League of Conservation Warriors donated 50 million. Is the U.S. gov't being captured by environmental advocacy groups?

If you look at foreign agent registered spending, Israel spent 5.7 million in 2024. Compare that with China who spent 5.8 billion with a B.
by heavyset_go | 2025-06-22 00:57:08+00:00
> I'm not sure your second point holds either - for most nations, an active connection to imap.gmail.com leaks little other than how actively the user uses gmail. Correlating senders and receivers from that data sounds technically challenging enough that I wouldn't expect repressive regimes to be capable. But, to be fair, I base that on nothing.

Nations don't have to do any of that, they can just subpoena the email host for the data, or just ask nicely for it, as companies are wont to work with law enforcement and the regimes they do business with.

The point of many of anonymizing and "private" chat services is the lack of data sitting on third-party hosts that can later be shared with adversaries.
by aisenik | 2025-06-22 00:57:12+00:00
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ali_Khamenei%27s_fatwa_against...

Probably something other than the one thing that would justify lifting the mid 90's fatwa declaring the creation, possession, and use of nuclear weapons against Islamic law.

How aware is this community of the Supreme Leader's staunch opposition to nuclear weapons?

This is pure imperialism.
by Calwestjobs | 2025-06-22 00:57:41+00:00
or let me say it differently, my house needs as much energy to make it luxuriously comfortable in coldest of days, as my neighbors house loses just thru chimney, when there is no fire burning... ( he needs 50times more energy then me, but he is not comfortable, he wakes up into cold house )

there is insanely huge gap in peoples perception of reality, schooling failed many.

less energy i need, less energy we need to capture (new word for generate), transmit, curtail, store,.... my heat pump is smaller then heat pump in costcos meat refrigerator, so smaller device is easier, quicker to manufacture, less people, cars , cubic feet to store, transport,.... and all this effect from on freaking house.

or hurricane, tornado, flood disables grid in my area, my house will stay livable for 3 days until i have to put on sweater... or today, there is heat wave predicted, at least 10 people will die today,... why?
by colechristensen | 2025-06-22 00:58:04+00:00
If I find something without particular significance that's not a part of an archaeological site, say a Roman coin in a field somewhere, it's fine if there's a requirement that a museum gets to take records and do any sort of scans it wants. But unless it was some item of particular cultural heritage or research interest, the museum should give it back to me or buy it from me or give me something in return like a fair tax break.

Lots and lots of stuff gets cataloged and archived and basically never looked at again resulting in little archeological value or any other public value and is kind of just scientific hoarding.
by yyyk | 2025-06-22 00:59:08+00:00
Just about every intelligence agency and expert agrees on nearly all the data. The debate and the 'conflicting' reports are mainly a matter of definitions.

The data is that Iran has some weapons research, and have/had about 400kg of 60% enriched Uranium (no civilian use), an higher amount of lower grade enriched Uranium, and a certain number of centrifuges for enrichment.

The interpretation bit is regarding what's called 'weaponization' (aka taking all the materials and converting them to a bomg):

A modern bomb would use >90% (preferably >95%) Uranium and an implosion mechanism and be light and small enough to put on a common ballistic missile. While getting to 90% would have been easy for them (at one time they 'accidentally' enriched to 88%), they haven't done it yet, and it isn't entirely clear how close they are on miniaturization.

A hacky bomb could use a lower grade of Uranium (60% would barely do if they pooled all of it), be much heavier (it comes with the lower grade), possibly use a simpler gun-type mechanism, and would have to be delivered with some custom mechanism.

So 'weapons grade' could mean '90% and above', or it could mean 'enriched to a level that has no use apart from building weapons'. 'Distance to a bomb' could mean 'distance from what can be easily delivered' or 'distance from any fissile explosive'.
by bell-cot | 2025-06-22 01:00:13+00:00
Buried deep in the article is a quick nod to the relative ease of work-arounds, for org's actually aspiring to competence:

> I once asked a U.S. cybersecurity executive how his company handled the banned-documents problem in the context of securing the networks of their own clients. His answer: They would assign U.S. leaks to British analysts and leaked U.K. documents to American analysts.

But mostly the article is a simplistic attack on a simplistic policy, by a (claimed) John Hopkins professor in this area. Very heavy on how the current policy makes his life in academia more difficult. Minimal interest in what workable improvements (from the US Nat'l Security Establishment's PoV) would look like. And scarcely a mention that the whole problem would be far smaller if our Establishment was less shitty at preventing leaks of its secret documents.

EDIT/Responses:

(Dylan16807) Yes, small picture, the leaks are a different topic. But at the "professor of strategic studies" level, arguing for changes in national security policy - maybe he should pay more attention to the bigger picture? That could include mention of the degree to which "simplistic idiocy" security policies discourage and demotivate the young people who our Establishment needs as responsible clerks handling its secret documents.

(cowsandmilk) The "(claimed)" is a sarcastic dig - at the sophisticated worldview which he should bring to this subject, vs. the simplistic way he presents in the article.
by ncr100 | 2025-06-22 01:00:34+00:00
Cough, AI Training Models, Cough

There's great power in abstraction. Disagree?

Your point is that an operating system, and its shell, all running on a machine, and a collection of apps, are somehow smaller than a wrapper application.

I'm curious the amount of bytes the entire stack, minus the chrome which is the complaint I believe, how many bytes that is. I would say probably a gig.
by shihab | 2025-06-22 01:01:20+00:00
This strike didn't happen to protect Americans from nukes, this happened to protect a rogue politician who was about to be impeached by his countrymen, and to make the Greater Israel project come true.

Reminder, a recent survey found 16% American supported an offensive strike against Iran.[1]

[1] https://www.axios.com/2025/06/19/israel-iran-war-americans-p...
by joeblubaugh | 2025-06-22 01:01:38+00:00
It’s too bad that Texas’ joke of an electrical grid defeated the project, but I think private profit on energy generation is really unlikely and produces a lot of bad incentives for plant operators.

In California the companies also systematically under-invest in capacity and maintenance, so the up-front cost of any project, even single home solar can get unpredictable fast.
by yencabulator | 2025-06-22 01:01:50+00:00
That's my point. If given a link to a random article about macOS details, I expect to be able to identify it as such, and not just be completely baffled. As a macOS user looking at the Hyprland page, you won't even know if it's meant for macOS, Windows, Linux, Android -- even the idea that it's software is only by implication.
by protocolture | 2025-06-22 01:02:01+00:00
>How would law abiding citizen Joe Random from Nowhere even know where to offload that on the black market?

Considering the state of copper theft, the large number of videos on facebook and youtube describing how to melt metals into bar stock, and the low cost of the tools I dont know why this would be considered specialist knowledge.

Maybe if they needed aqua regia or something.
by Retric | 2025-06-22 01:02:05+00:00
Marketing overall doesn’t need to be effective marketing to me. It really depends on the product and strategy, YouTube can sell anything other options need to be product specific.

Being the value option is enabled by lower advertising spend but it also needs less advertising spend because it doesn’t look overpriced in comparison. PR firms for example may be able to get a few articles written quietly pushing your product. https://paulgraham.com/submarine.html However spending 100x as much doesn’t get you 100x as many articles. Diminishing returns hit hard and YouTube or other mass market advertisers is low on that list.

Companies can employ multiple strategies, Lexis and Toyota are car brands under the same entity targeting essentially completely different customers bases with two completely independent advertising budgets.
by jm4 | 2025-06-22 01:02:19+00:00
It wasn’t a good deal. It was also probably the best deal that could have been achieved at any point in the past 20 years. More importantly, it would have kept things on an even keel and kept us talking to each other for as long as we both honored the deal. It was an opportunity to see if we could build a little bit of trust and make another deal later. Yes, it kicked the can down the road. It also represented a willingness on the part of both countries to try to avoid a conflict even though we both had reasons to want one.

It’s possible it would have been a complete failure. We will never know. What we do know for sure is that we have had fewer options for dealing with the situation since we pulled out of the deal and now we are at war.

Our country’s handling of Iran has been nothing short of a spectacular blunder. Two administrations have tried to negotiate out of the hole Trump got us into when he tore up the deal. The buffoon actually thought he would cancel the deal and make a better one. Now, after 20+ years of criticizing the Iraq war and campaigning three times on not starting new wars, he is the trigger man getting us into a new one when we are least prepared for it.
by yyyk | 2025-06-22 01:03:19+00:00
>The position you're taking only really works if you start from "Iran will always work towards having a nuclear bomb, no matter what."

No, it's a position that assumes some people there have an interest in a nuclear bomb, and some suspicion is warranted - which means a safe deal needed to have them some distance away from a bomb.

After all, if they just wanted nuclear power, they could have trivially had it without all this fuss. It was always so much cheaper to buy LEU than endure all these sanctions.
by baxtr | 2025-06-22 01:04:05+00:00
Ok wow this is actually frightening.

I talked to a friend recently who is a plastic surgeon. He told me about a young pretty girl came in recently with super clear ideas what she wanted to fixed.

Turns out she uploaded her pictures to an LLM and it gave her recommendations.

My friend told her she didn’t need any treatment at this stage but she kept insisting that the LLM had told her this and that.

I’m worried that these young folks just trust whatever these things tell them to do is right.
by YZF | 2025-06-22 01:04:46+00:00
What was to stop Iran from secretly enriching Uranium in sites inspectors have no access to?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_program_of_Iran#Secret...

"The revelation that Iran had built major nuclear facilities in secret, without required disclosure to the IAEA, ignited an international crisis and raised questions about the program's true aim."
by aisenik | 2025-06-22 01:05:31+00:00
Did I say the Supreme Leader is a benign figure? Iran has problems. Big ones.

You are disingenuous and malicious when you portray my position in this way. The Supreme Leader has a longstanding public opposition to nuclear weapons. He is the respected religious leader of the Iranian government. The actions of the Iranian government, including their adherence to the JCPOA that Trump capriciously discarded, are consistent with this fatwa.

You must provide some other justification for your stance than merely accepting the US propaganda.
by SllX | 2025-06-22 01:05:35+00:00
https://www.jagcnet.army.mil/ACMPRS/cases/docket-case-list

Anything that violates the Uniform Code of Military Justice can land a soldier in the Army on that list up to and including killing random civilians abroad with military equipment outside the scope of an operation. You can look up the dockets for the other service branches yourself, but you don’t get impunity for all of your actions just for being part of the military.

Or if you want something more specific, here’s a rather high profile example: https://www.salon.com/2006/03/14/prosecutions_convictions/
by smashah | 2025-06-22 01:06:39+00:00
The premise of going to war with a country because that country may have the capability to win/end it is quite demonic circular reasoning. In this case IL/US should preemptively bunker bust every person in the region that has sovereign will. I think only when the entire region is replaced by Tesla Robots loyal to western chauvinism then IL/US can finally feel safe from the consequences of their own actions like committing genocides.

I visited Nagasaki/Hiroshima a few years ago, at the end of both memorials there are celebrations of NPTs and denuclearization efforts with veneers of 90's nostalgia - as if the job were done. How wrong we all were, today 2 non-NPT nuclear powers bombed a NPT non-nuclear power to prevent imaginary WMD Nukes, triggering a possible regional conflict that will kill millions. The only country that shouldn't have nukes is America - they dropped 2 for vibes because the Nazis already surrendered and they wanted to try out their new toy. IL\US project their genocidal tendencies onto others then claim preemptive strikes. Both countries a threat to world peace. It's clear now the only way these two countries leave you alone is if you have a nuke. Any sovereign logical leader will now pursue them. IL/US have made the world a much more dangerous place just because they want to continue the holocaust of Gaza.

Shame.
by jiggawatts | 2025-06-22 01:07:03+00:00
I only ever got it to a proof of concept. The back end worked as advertised, the issue was that there are too many bugs in WMI so collecting that many performance counters had weird side effects.

Google was doing something comparable internally and this spawned some fun blog titles like “I have 64 cores but I can’t even move my mouse cursor.”
by MarkMarine | 2025-06-22 01:07:19+00:00
That is the point of what I was saying, yes.

Look I dgaf about what Iran was doing, there is no wool over my eyes about what that state is capable of. I saw the IEDs with copper cones used to kill and maim my friends, they almost certainly came from Iran.

What I care about is: congress declares war, not the executive. The people should decide, and we just stepped 10 steps closer to the monarchy we tried to depose 250 years ago.
From Gateway to Guardian – Rethinking MCP Security
by subramanya1997 | 2025-06-22 01:07:24+00:00
Centralized gateways for AI tools simplify access but often become a single point of compromise. In this article, I propose evolving the MCP gateway into a security-centric "Guardian" by adding identity-aware authentication, dynamic authorization, and real-time threat monitoring. This approach significantly mitigates risks like prompt-injection and data-exfiltration attacks.

Full post: https://subramanya.ai/2025/06/21/from-gateway-to-guardian-the-evolution-of-mcp-security/

Feedback welcome!
by JumpCrisscross | 2025-06-22 01:08:49+00:00
> it also makes the case that a lot of the races that are indeed somewhat low-profile, and that's where money makes the big impact

I will amend my prior statements to be constrained to national politics. You can absolutely buy policy at the state and local level, because if you’re a candidate’s sole sugar daddy you have obvious influence over and goodwill owed from them.

The moment a candidate gains a profile, however, that channel becomes a two-way street. Donors will donate to maintain access and goodwill. Refusing to donate means being cut off; the elected has the leverage.
by FridayoLeary | 2025-06-22 01:08:53+00:00
Oil for starters. Iran is the principle destabilising element in the middle east. By proxy they are participating in every conflict.

A nuclear iran would be completely intolerable, never mind that their regime might just be lunatic enough to use them.

Add that war is bad for the whole world.

So the us benefits that it protects her economic (and strategic) interests in the ME, which are real and extremely important, at the low cost of a limited air campaign.

There are further moral arguments, but i'm answering your question in the most direct way.
by yyyk | 2025-06-22 01:10:11+00:00
>follow on decoupling from Russia

You are aware the deal was entirely dependent on Russia, and the follow-on Biden wanted to sign (but couldn't since Iran wouldn't fully cooperate with IAEA) involved Russia even more heavily? There's no other place that both sides accept can store the enriched Uranium or supply fuel rods to Iran.

>Isotope separation by centrifuge as a physical process follows the laws of diminishing returns

It's the other way around. Going from 3 to 20 percent is much harder than 20 to 60 which is harder than 60 to 90. Going to 99.9999% would be tough, but is unnecessary even for nukes.

>"Just a step away" was more a hard bridge to cross back when third party inspectors were at the enrichment centres

They were allowed to enrich to that level under the deal starting in 2031, inspections would have tested if the enriched material was diverted.

Even if they could be effective at such short notice, it would have taken the US being distracted by some other crisis and being unable to act in the short period between detection and weaponization to lead to a nuke.
by fc417fc802 | 2025-06-22 01:11:34+00:00
That is exactly what I'm wondering about. At least a few states have severely limited noncompetes and even outright banned them in specific contexts. I have to wonder if a nondisclosure twisted for use as a noncompete would survive the courts in one of those states.

I'm also skeptical how enforceable this theory is in general. Have there been any noteworthy cases of employees getting screwed over that rested on it?