MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
Show HN: Hood Ball – Multiplayer car-based soccer battle (v2)
by PhilDunphy23 | 2025-06-06 17:23:04+00:00
I published this game here a few months ago, and since then I've made some major fixes, improved the netcode, and added a debug menu to inspect the game and network state. Hope you enjoy it!

Features:

- Passkey for registration and login

- JSON Web Tokens for game server authentication

- WebSocket for real-time notifications and tunneled communication between server and player - WebRTC for real-time communication between host and players

- Web Crypto API for server configuration and player scores handling

- Debug menu for inspecting game and network state (new!)

Game's source code: https://github.com/MiguelRipoll23/hood-ball

Server's source code: https://github.com/MiguelRipoll23/gameserver
by aphyr | 2025-06-06 17:23:06+00:00
Yeah, TigerBeetle's blog post goes into more detail here, but in short, the tests that were running in Antithesis (which were remarkably thorough) didn't happen to generate the precise combination of intersecting queries and out-of-order values that were necessary to find the index bug, whereas the Jepsen generator did hit that combination.

There are almost certainly blind spots in the Jepsen test generators too--that's part of why designing different generators is so helpful!
by tredre3 | 2025-06-06 17:23:39+00:00
> When you consider the growing evidence that we've seen over the years that apparently unresponsive people can be fully aware of their surroundings, this is truly terrifying.

We're also seeing growing evidence that a fair amount of people regain consciousness under general anaesthesia (but remain fully paralyzed), despite the common wisdom putting it as much less than 1%. What is uncommon is to remember it afterwards, because the drugs cocktail prevents memory formation.

https://www.sydney.edu.au/news-opinion/news/2022/05/24/durin...

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/sep/10/surgery-pati...
by cryptonector | 2025-06-06 17:24:24+00:00
Well, for one thing a dependence on an interface could not have a hash to bind the provider(s), but one could have a dependence on an interface and also associated dependencies on one-of-N providers of the interface, then the latter could have hashes.

Basically you need a way to indicate "this package is an interface and requires providers of it" and also you need a way to indicate which packages are the associated providers (either as attributes of the interface PURLs, as attributes of the provider PURLs, or both).
by wvenable | 2025-06-06 17:24:24+00:00
The paywall news sites want to have their cake and eat it to -- they want web crawlers, like Google, to read the full contents of the article but hide it from site visitors.

If they simply put all their content behind a paywall entirely and effectively then this would be a non-issue.

If ChatGPT is getting this content it's literally because they allow it.
by jadbox | 2025-06-06 17:24:33+00:00
I've been working on a side project called Solomon's Agent, a fast command-line tool designed to reduce the friction of interacting with the web. Instead of switching to a browser for a quick lookup or form submission, you can pass a URL directly to the agent to get the key details and interact with the page. It fetches the page content, uses an AI model (Gemini) to generate a concise summary, and then identifies interactive elements like links and forms. You're then presented with a clean prompt in your terminal, allowing you to read the gist or act on the page without leaving the command line.

Basically, this tool acts as a smart filter for webpages while retaining interaction. It parses a page to surface only the essential content and the most common next steps, streamlining tasks like reading the news, researching on Wikipedia, or getting a quick weather update.

The project started as a fun exploration while I look for my next role. It's built with TypeScript, using Playwright for headless Browse and @clack/prompts for an elegant CLI experience. The goal was to create a more focused way to engage with web content, stripping away the noise and getting straight to the information and actions. The code is still in its early stages, and I would love to get your feedback and hear any ideas you might have (PR welcome).

P.s. it currently only handles simple single field forms like search boxes.
by ty6853 | 2025-06-06 17:26:44+00:00
You mean like the great depression which happened not long after formation, which some prominent economists have argued was exacerbated by the fed?

Things did stabilize quite a bit after we bombed the rest of the industrial world into oblivion, though, creating a period of prosperity roughly equal in expansion to the period from the end of the civil war to before the creation of the fed.
by hanspeter | 2025-06-06 17:26:47+00:00
I don't think this is a dark-pattern problem in the sense that I don't think it is _intentionally_ deceiving.

I think Meta fully expected this feature to be used by people who are excited about their conversation with the AI and wants to share it publicly. Just like we see with OpenAI Sora.

There's not much to win for Meta if users instead are unknowingly sharing deeply personal conversations.
by mindslight | 2025-06-06 17:27:08+00:00
I've never been uncomfortable about returning stuff that is broken or defective. However the proportion of that has been steadily increasing. Recently I went through 9 sets of casters just to get 4 working sets. Churned through 15 Dell monitors just to get 3 without dead pixels (half of the ones I returned would have qualified for warranty replacement 3 years out!). Fifteen gas cans all returned because they were shipped bare without boxes, arriving in beat up salvage condition.

And furthermore now that I'm doing so many returns, I've become completely fine with returning new unopened things that I decide I don't want, effectively delaying the actual purchase decision 30-90 days. Parts that I want to have on hand while doing a project, limited time deals from pricing games, extra copies I order preemptively to quicken the above self-QC song and dance, etc. If I already have to go to a store to drop off returns, my marginal cost of returning additional things is very low.

If returns were really affecting bottom lines, companies could do a lot to tamp down on these dynamics. At this point I suspect it's more profitable for them not to. I think the manufacturing costs of stuff has just gotten so low that the physical items themselves just don't end up mattering compared to the overall margins.
by bigyabai | 2025-06-06 17:27:31+00:00
Well, your first three claims are subjective and your second two claims are something both Meta, Microsoft and Google have all done themselves. I was focusing more on what made Apple unique, not why people want to exonerate them so desperately. Your could use the same defense to protect Facebook and nobody could objectively disprove you.

Cause like... we could start judging companies based on how many carbon credits they buy. But that wouldn't make Microsoft or Apple or Google any less evil, so it's a non-sequitur. Apple can simultaneously mass-produce the most desirable hardware in the world while creating anticompetitive market conditions that debilitates fair choice and destroys legitimate value. The United States threatened to break up Microsoft for the same overreach.
by drivingmenuts | 2025-06-06 17:27:31+00:00
HN is about the Austin of tech sites. It sounds like a really awesome place where people are inventing cool things. Then the techbros show up and start techbro-ing and it becomes a bit less cool. Then the VC's show up and start drawing out the engineers and techbros and … well, you get HN.

Lobste.rs is where stuff is actually getting done without much comment.
by fc417fc802 | 2025-06-06 17:27:42+00:00
What is complicated about having the local client upload its database to a remote endpoint? It's literally opening a network connection and proceeding to write out a database dump to it.

Anyway the difficulty of the task itself is traditionally taken to be irrelevant when performing cryptographic threat analysis. The question is about what is and is not mathematically impossible for an adversary to do.
by kleiba | 2025-06-06 17:27:57+00:00
> Late Thursday, OpenAI confronted user panic over a sweeping court order requiring widespread chat log retention—including users' deleted chats—after moving to appeal the order that allegedly impacts the privacy of hundreds of millions of ChatGPT users globally.

When "delete" actually means "hide from my view", you can only hope that you live in a country with strong privacy and data protection laws.
by paxys | 2025-06-06 17:28:20+00:00
It's pretty much a guarantee that Musk has copies of federal tax, healthcare, social security, immigration and several other databases on his private servers. DOGE illegally got unrestricted and unaudited access to all of it. His underlings might have privately made copies as well. They were (and probably still are) operating outside the US government structure and laws. None of the employees have security clearance. Musk himself was never officially a government employee, yet had unrestricted authority over the department. What do you think he's going to do with it now?
by mardifoufs | 2025-06-06 17:28:26+00:00
So, no actual proof? And actually no, at least where I live, for the first two weeks masks were strongly discouraged and were said to be useless by our local government (Quebec). That was for the first 2 weeks of the pandemic, which were the most important in terms of spread. Even hospital staff were told to not wear them. I'm glad YouTube didn't ban anyone who didn't agree with our local government's opinion on masks then.

Also, that's funny since again, here in Quebec and in most of the world kids were back to school by autumn 2020. Yet it took more than a year after that for children in the US to go back to school. I guess American experts just knew more than everyone else. It's as if things aren't as cut and dry as you make them out to be.
by hombre_fatal | 2025-06-06 17:28:52+00:00
It's not that the convos are necessarily icky.

It's that it's like watching how someone might treat a slave when they think they're alone. And how you might talk down to or up to something that looks like another person. And how pathetic you might act when it's not doing what you want. And what level of questions you outsource to an LLM. And what things you refuse to do yourself. And how petty the tasks might be, like workshopping a stupid twitter comment before you post it. And how you copied that long text from your distraught girlfriend and asked it for some response ideas. etc. etc. etc.

At the very least, I'd wager that it reveals that bit of true helpless patheticness inherent in all of us that we try so hard to hide.

Show me your LLM chat history and I will learn a lot about your personality. Nothing else compares.
by HelloMcFly | 2025-06-06 17:29:22+00:00
> I think Meta fully expected this feature to be used by people who are excited about their conversation with the AI and wants to share it publicly.

That's really what you think? And what they think? That people are so enamored - in droves - with their exchange with a chatbot that they're trying to share it for the world to see?

Maybe I'm the old fogey who doesn't get it, but it's just hard for me to believe that this is something many people want, or something that smart people think others earnestly want. Again, I may be the outlier here, but this just sounds crazy to me.
by unsnap_biceps | 2025-06-06 17:29:27+00:00
zfs snapshots are difficult to offsite in non-zfs replicas, say like an S3 bucket.

That said, there's another less known feature that bundles help out with when used with `git clone --bundle-uri` The client can specify a location to a bundle, or the server can send the client the bundle location in the clone results and the client can fetch the bundle, unpack it, and then update the delta via the git server, so it's a lot lighter weight on the server for cloning large repos, and a ton faster for the client for initial clones.
by AdmiralAsshat | 2025-06-06 17:29:53+00:00
Used to run into this error frequently with a piece of software I supported. I don't remember the specifics, but it was your basic C program to process a record-delimited datafile. A for-loop with an fopen that didn't have a corresponding fclose at the end of the loop. For a sufficiently large datafile, eventually we'd run out of file handles.
by Lammy | 2025-06-06 17:30:38+00:00
> What this means for GitLab customers — [a bunch of stuff about how customers can now back up more frequently and more robustly]

Realtalk: They should rewrite this post's headline to be in a positive tense instead of leading with a negative word. I'm glad I read the post, because it is a cool and good fix, but I saw “Decreasing […] repo backup” and my first thought was that it was an announcement of some service downgrade like some sort of cost-cutting measure.
by psb217 | 2025-06-06 17:31:18+00:00
You wouldn't get 5 years to noodle -- maybe 1 or 2 at best. You're competing for your next thing against other smart folks who are going hard on maximizing publication rate and grant winning in their current thing. To continue with your riskier, bigger thinking you'd have to be ready to bet that: (i) you'll produce a highly impactful result before you start applying for your next thing and (ii) the high impactfulness of that result will be recognized in time to support your applications.

The most successful folks tend to mix talent and hard work with a bit of luck in terms of early gold striking to gain a quick boost of credibility that helps them draw other people into their fold (eg, grad students in a big lab) who can handle a lot of the metric maxxing to free up some (still not enough) time for more ambitious thinking.
by BobaFloutist | 2025-06-06 17:31:20+00:00
It kind of introduces a fun thought experiment, of a super high-level, complex equivalent of the Monty Hall Problem (which is so counterintuitive that even very intelligent and mathematically literate people will outright refuse to accept the established truth). How would we ever establish truth on something so monstrously complicated that only ~10-100 people in the world could possibly understand and at the same time so divisive that there cannot be a strong consensus?
by netsharc | 2025-06-06 17:31:43+00:00
I don't think e.g. NordVPN has any offices in France, but in theory the French authorities could tell French ISPs to block access to nordvpn.com (and all other Nord domains), though I'm not sure if the law applies to "secondary services" (instead of ordering ISPs to block domains that offer pirated sports streams, they'd be told to block domains that offer a service to circumvent the block).

I believe Russia is doing it like this, trying to connect to a VPN provider's website will fail - interestingly NordVPN's app uses SSO to login, so blocking their main site would block the app's ability to log in.
by marsten | 2025-06-06 17:32:03+00:00
I've always found it amusing that mathematically it should be the rule of 70, but it's commonly rounded to 72 because the latter has more convenient divisors.

70 is divisible by 1, 2, 5, 7, 10, 14, 35, 70

72 is divisible by 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 9, 12, 18, 24, 36, 72
by groby_b | 2025-06-06 17:32:13+00:00
> Except, they make bizarre mistakes that human juniors would not,

You underestimate juniors - Stack Overflow has done marvels to expand the capacity for bizarre mistakes :)

> these models do not themselves have a model of the computation underlying the code they produce—which in my experience makes the whole process of working with them endlessly frustrating.

I think that's... up for debate. They are able to do work that requires at least a very convincing facsimile of understanding. (My favorite benchmark is a couple of 100-500 line pieces of hand-obfuscated C++ with eldritch template horrors, and "what does this do" elicits a perfectly good explanation - and the code is definitely not in the corpus)

What they don't have is an ability to infer constraints you didn't explicitly or implicitly spell out. And only limited capability to ask clarifying question. Therein lies the rub - each interaction requires amounts of detail that you only have at the very beginning of a work relationship with a junior.

You _can_ spell it out, and they do much better. It's just extremely tedious.

They also are horrible at correcting mistakes through ongoing conversation. If your LLM goes off into error land, just give up, reformulate the entire problem, and try again.

In essence, you write a PRD and DD, plus a task breakdown, every single time.

If you work on something that justifies this overhead - great time savers. If you work on something that can be done sloppily - great time savers. But a lot of code is in between those two lane markers.
by divbzero | 2025-06-06 17:32:15+00:00
I always assumed that compiling code to run in the browser would be slow, but OP points out that this is not the case. As the Emscripten project describes:

> Thanks to the combination of LLVM, Emscripten, Binaryen, and WebAssembly, the output is compact and runs at near-native speed.

https://emscripten.org/
by cryptonector | 2025-06-06 17:33:15+00:00
I remember "inventing" a tv watch when I was 5. Clearly that's not an invention.

On the other hand coming up with the idea of the solid state transistor in the mid 1920s is not as useless an invention as my 5 year old self's invention of the tv watch. On the contrary, it was a brilliant idea. There is no doubt a longer story about why it didn't go anywhere then, and the fact that it didn't go anywhere tends to negate the claim to "invention", but that's semantics. The idea itself was world-changing. I'm sure Shockley, Brattain, and Bardeen were aware of this earlier work and would have found it inspiring because if there was any way to achieve solid state transistors... (Imagine how WWII would have gone had one of the major powers had solid state transistors.)
by w10-1 | 2025-06-06 17:33:34+00:00
Here's the paper: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-025-60001-2

To be clear: they deliver the HIV TAT protein which activates latent cells to transcribe HIV (ultimately possibly producing viable HIV virions).

Activating-to-kill has been pursued with other agents, but none have proven effective at depleting the reservoir. (The latent reservoir requires HIV anti-retroviral therapy to be lifelong, making one of the top three most expensive diseases in the US).

This may be more of a proof for the method, of encapsulating a fragile mRNA in a protective lipid layer, but one which will be incorporated into cells. I'd expect it to be used outside attempts to cure HIV (having consumed some HIV funding).
by catlikesshrimp | 2025-06-06 17:33:42+00:00
If a murderer hides in your home, or not, when you and your children are inside, whether you like it or not, you can be bombed, if said house is in Gaza.

If you live in the US or Israel, you would have hundreds of effectives for every house, instead of killing people in a ratio of 60 to 1 (and counting)
by dgfitz | 2025-06-06 17:34:11+00:00
I also come from a family with substance issues, alcohol et. al. You can use your imagination.

I focused on the water thing because it is so, so easy to smash a 20oz coke without thinking about it, twice a day even. I’m sure I don’t need to inform you about the nutritional information of coke, but 40oz a day negates any kind of diet or exercise two-fold.

I also made the point about 3 meals completely because of metabolism and the bad effects of eating only once a day. There is however value in skipping breakfast and only eating lunch and dinner, but not if you just make up for breakfast with the other two meals.

The world isn’t black and white, absolutism is never a good thing unless you’re designing digital circuits or some other “there is no other choice but binary” but there already is an exception to your rule.

Keep an open mind. You sound like you’ve talked yourself out of lots of things and seem to have accepted defeat and blamed your circumstances. Coming from the same background as you I would encourage you to at least admit to yourself the things you already know and excuse away. When I finally had that moment it was a game changer.
by margalabargala | 2025-06-06 17:34:50+00:00
Yeah, because Google at that time claimed to be the sort of company that would listen to complaints. Being upset with a company for not following their own publicly stated policies, e.g. the bait and switch of "20% time" plus "we're assigning you at least 40 hours work per week" is entirely reasonable and not an implied "and I should be running things".

Some people are able to point out problems without saying "and I am the solution".

Others are not capable of seeing a problem pointed out without assuming the speaker is holding themselves up as a paragon of what ought be.
by lurk2 | 2025-06-06 17:35:02+00:00
Documentation, too. I know it’s hard writing instructions with context you already have (think of the “Tell me how to make a peanut butter sandwich” demonstration), but too often I come across projects that I can’t even figure out how to run. This used to be a complete roadblock if the software was old; now you can at least use LLMs to walk you through it.

Any project that is based on network effects is doomed to failure if it can’t get this right. I think about this kind of thing a lot (and roll my eyes) when I see people on Hacker News complaining about “non-technicals” while assuming they could learn the skills that they have over the course of a weekend.
by WorldMaker | 2025-06-06 17:35:12+00:00
This is what happens when you let Mathematicians name things on chalkboards. They don't want to run out of chalk and they get tired of spelling whole words very easily so they use short names and silly symbols. The name foldl' is "just" "fold left prime". Remember ' means "prime" from calculus class and thinking that was silly even then? Accidentally infected Haskell at a young age.
by ChrisMarshallNY | 2025-06-06 17:35:42+00:00
It’s almost impossible to understand, just from looking at the comic. Some of his comics are like that.

I stared at it for quite a while, before it “clicked.”

Once it did, the message was obvious.

The PowerPoint was designed to be presented. It’s not particularly useful, just being read. It really needs a narrator that can explain the concepts.

The idea is that it’s possible to communicate effectively, even when it seems impossible, as long as we are willing to take responsibility for the message, and figure out how to make it work. In order to do that, we need to understand the message, the recipient, the context, and the medium.

It also shows how we can lose the message, when we get sidetracked by the messenger or the medium.
by kassner | 2025-06-06 17:36:14+00:00
Haven’t you seen people getting their Google accounts banned out of the blue? Haven’t you seen the great lengths that YouTube goes (in terms of content control) to please its advertisers? Haven’t you seen the cat-and-mouse fight between YouTube and yt-dlp (and similars)?

There is no “if”, but only a “when” for all of those things will be connected.

It’s naïve to think you can make YouTube not get paid without them trying to stop you. And it’s quite likely this is already against their ToS.