MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by radicality | 2025-06-20 00:09:16+00:00
Yeah I noticed that too, it’s a bit crazy to me that stuff like this is getting upvotes and traction. It feels like it was vibe-coded in one-shot style without perhaps even reading any bit of the code. A bunch of hardcoded values, a `sleep(3)`, bunch of other antipatterns.

Up until recently I tended to “trust” github repos a bit more, now I feel like I need to have my guard up so I don’t fall into a trap of using something like this. Funnily enough a good first metric for me now is # of emojis in the readme - the more emojis the more likely you should stay away from it
by qualeed | 2025-06-20 00:09:24+00:00
>The other techniques you mentioned also suffer from some drawbacks.

Of course, which is why I never implied that they don't have drawbacks. Just that the drawbacks of this method, in the context of privacy and tracking, are much more numerous.

>And I want to reiterate that you don't know how prone this new technology is to false positives, you don't know how cheap it can be made.

I don't know how cheap it will be, that's true (it's probably more expensive, in time and money, than an air tag or pin camera). But it is pretty easy to figure out that this will have more false positives than every other current tracking method. Give me an air filter and 30 minutes to walk through a store, and I can make it look like dozens of people were in places they never were. That's not an issue with any other method, especially considering the effort to produce false positives by a bad actor is ~0.

>Just to illustrate, instead of figuring out how to put concealed cameras in the entries of a building, could it be enough to place a small device near the ventilation exhaust fan?

Even if we ignore the false positives and difference in cost, this wouldn't let you pinpoint timing, any other information about the person that might be valuable (who else was with the person, what they were wearing, etc.), has a risk of contamination, doesn't have the ability to give real-time results, no option of capturing audio... Probably several other downsides I'm not thinking of immediately.

Again, I'm not saying that this technology is completely useless. Just that, compared to all of the technology already invading your privacy, this technology is a large step backwards in practically every privacy-related metric.

Raising a fuss about stuff like this is how ordinary people get fatigued by "privacy nuts" and stop caring about the dozens of technologies and policies which are significantly worse, which are already invading our privacy.
by Boogie_Man | 2025-06-20 00:09:25+00:00
Someone got mad at me today because I said "we beat slavery" was I accidentally dog whistling? It's just how I thought about it. I guess "white people" did beat it but also "white people" were doing it. We kind of beat it as a country is what I meant. Idk my family wasn't even here yet but I'm just happy there isn't slavery.
by Lerc | 2025-06-20 00:09:38+00:00
I would say most technology that is dangerous is so a way that lies in the range from Table-Saw to Asbestos. A table saw at one end is when it performs it's intended function but on something different to what it was designed for, with harmful consequences. The other end is asbestos where there is a harmful outcome that is completely incidental to the targeted function.

Very little technology is designed specifically to harm, but still more than I am happy with. On the other hand most would support the idea of employing such a means if their own survival is at stake. While it is easy to argue against attack drones in the abstract, when you consider the situation where Ukraine employed drones to effectively reduce the amount of bombing their country would receive, it's hard not to sympathise with someone who wants the bombs to stop.
by TheOtherHobbes | 2025-06-20 00:10:36+00:00
DOGE is not a joke. DOGE is the modern equivalent of an enclosure act - privatisation of state data for private profit and political leverage, some of which will be wielded by hostile countries.

And Musk was personally responsible - not just for that atrocity, but for poisoning the world's leading progressive social media site, for being complicit in the neutering of countless world-leading science projects, for defunding basic research at NASA and firing hundreds of employees with solid achievements and genuine passion for space science, for gutting the FAA, and so on.

I cannot say enough unkind things about the man. The fact that he has any kind of following at all after the last year is both shocking and disappointing.
by gopher_space | 2025-06-20 00:12:30+00:00
Ever had a conversation with someone who literally cannot reexamine their base principles? Like, it's functionally impossible for them? That's everyone's central criticism of rationalists.

Being able to do that is pretty much "entry level cognition" for a lot of us. You should be doing that yourself and doing it all the time if you want to play with the big kids.

One of the things I really miss about the old nerds-only programmer's pit setup was the amount of room we had for instruction, especially regarding social issues. The scenes from the college department in Wargames were really on the nose, but highlight a form of education that was unavoidable if you couldn't just dip out of a conversation.
by bigyabai | 2025-06-20 00:12:43+00:00
People kinda underestimate how much the economy has changed, and with it, the demand for different businesses has ebbed and flowed. The postwar economy was deeply pragmatic for America, and our production lines could be leveraged by clever entrepreneurs to manufacture high-margin goods. The key to success in these years was material wealth; producing a lot of something meant you could make proportionally more money. Industrial logic still applied, at least for a little while.

But the demands for making a successful business has changed. The US economy financialized[0] and a lot of the value derived from physical innovation was supplanted by financial maneuvering. In simple terms, it became easier to make money with a contrived licensing scheme or asset-trading cabal than it was to make a good or desirable product. Reciprocally, investors became cagey with "real world" problem solvers and adopted a moonshot mentality, looking for equity in risky areas over safer but less profitable opportunities.

As a founder, this means that no, you do not need to be academically smart to compete against the largest businesses in America. But you do have to try like hell regardless, because if you don't make hay while the sun is shining Wall Street will eat you for breakfast and burp up what's left of your offices on a Craigslist ad.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financialization
by teunispeters | 2025-06-20 00:13:02+00:00
paper forms of this have existed in land surveying ... for a long time. Mind, they didn't follow quadtree, just "useful at the time" scaling. From my vague memories of working with this and data in 1992-1993, I think older references often involved polyconic map coordinates. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rectangular_polyconic_projecti...
by tptacek | 2025-06-20 00:15:01+00:00
You know why I'm not coming back at you with links about registrar ATOs? Because they're so common that nobody writes research reports about them. I remember after Laurent Joncheray wrote his paper about off-path TCP hijacking back in 1995; for awhile, you'd have thought the whole Internet was going to fall to off-path TCP hijacking. (It did not.)
by AdieuToLogic | 2025-06-20 00:15:03+00:00
> You are very attached to this "voluminous" point. What do you mean by it?

I mean "a lot" or more specifically; "a whole lot."

Here is an exercise which illustrates this. For the purposes here, assume ASCII characters are used for log entries to make the math a bit easier.

Suppose the following:

Each log statement is 100 characters. Each service invocation emits 50 log statements. Average transactions per second during high usage is 200tps. High usage is on average 2 hours per day. 100 x 50 x 200 x 60 x 60 x 2 = 7_200_000_000 = 7.2GB / day

> So I ask you to quantify: What counts (to you) as voluminous, as in daily log file sizes, and how many times they are sent over the network?

The quantification is above and regarding log entries being sent over a network - in many production systems, log entries are unconditionally sent to a log aggregator and never stored in a local file system.
by old_man_cato | 2025-06-20 00:15:04+00:00
The image of a bunch of children in a room gleefully playing with their computers is horror movie type stuff, but because it's in a white room with plants and not their parent's basement with the lights off, it's somehow a wonderful future.

Karpathy and his peer group are some of the most elitist and anti social people who have ever lived. I wonder how history will remember them.
by theamk | 2025-06-20 00:16:12+00:00
If the problem is path between registrar and CA, then deploying the fix to clients seems like an absolute overkill.

Just create a secure path from CA to registrar. RDAP-based or DoH-based, or something from scratch, does not really matter. It will only need to cover few thousand CAs and TLDs, so it will be vastly simpler that upgrading billions of internet devices.
by VivaTechnics | 2025-06-20 00:16:35+00:00
Not the key factor for success, but a relevant side.

- Well, they worked hard and got into top schools. - Many VCs only fund founders from elite universities. As a result, people from non-Ivy backgrounds often don’t get funded. Even YC and similar funds rarely invest in them. Why does this matter? Because tech companies usually need to burn cash before becoming profitable. VC funding is essential in that early stage. - This wave is changing. AI is making traditional education and degrees irrelevant. - Today’s Ivy League schools are not what they were 10, 20, and 40 years ago. Many talented people are choosing not to attend these expensive institutions. So in the next 10–20 years, expect to see more successful tech founders from non-Ivy backgrounds.

Some names to remember (alphabetical order):

- Brian Chesky - Airbnb (Rhode Island School of Design) - Chris Wanstrath - GitHub (University of Cincinnati, dropout) - Daniel Ek - Spotify (Royal Institute of Technology, dropout) - David Karp - Tumblr (Bronx Science High School, no college) - Evan Williams - Blogger, Twitter, Medium (University of Nebraska–Lincoln, dropout) - Frank Wang - DJI (Hong Kong University of Science and Technology) - Jack Dorsey - Twitter (Missouri University of Science and Technology / NYU, dropout) - Jan Koum - WhatsApp (San Jose State University, dropout) - Markus Persson - Mojang (Minecraft) (No college) - Matt Mullenweg - WordPress (University of Houston, dropout) - Melanie Perkins - Canva (University of Western Australia, dropout) - Michael Dell - Dell Technologies (University of Texas at Austin, dropout) - Pavel Durov - Telegram (Saint Petersburg State University) - Richard Liu - JD.com (Renmin University of China) - Steve Jobs - Apple (Reed College, dropout) - Travis Kalanick - Uber (UCLA, dropout) - Whitney Wolfe Herd - Bumble (Southern Methodist University)
by scoofy | 2025-06-20 00:17:46+00:00
This type of reductionist take is unhelpful no matter who is making it. We can have a bunch of free states, with whites and blacks fighting for abolition as far back as the founding, and a bunch of slave states fighting for slavery.

Trying to flatten the situation into one general group vs another cannot explain the complexity of the situation, like the fact that there were black and mixed-race slave owners, or that Delaware fought for the Union Army despite being a slave state.
by tzs | 2025-06-20 00:18:17+00:00
"Emancipation Day" is way too ambiguous in the US because there are already several other days that are called "Emancipation Day" in various states [1].

They mostly all have something to do with the ending of slavery but it is different things in different states. For example in Massachusetts it is on July 8th and commemorates slavery being found to be legally unenforceable there under in a 1783 decision.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emancipation_Day#United_States
by viccis | 2025-06-20 00:18:44+00:00
Yeah I was specifically asking for synthetic a priori knowledge, which AI by definition can't provide. It can only estimate the joint distribution over tokens, so anything generated from it is by definition a posteriori. It can generate novel statements, but I don't think there's any compelling definition of "knowledge" (including the common JTB one) that could apply to what it actually is (it's just the highest probability semiotic result). And in fact, going by the JTB definition of knowledge, AI models making correct novel statements would just be an elaborate example of a Gettier problem.

I think LLMs as a symbolic layer (effective, as a "sense organ") with some kind of logical reasoning engine like everyone loved decades ago could accomplish something closer to "intelligence" or "thinking", which I assume is what you were implying with Lean.
by model-15-DAV | 2025-06-20 00:20:37+00:00
Elections at the local level should be governed by the locality. I do not see the need for standards at a higher level, other than for democracy to be maintained in some fashion. External data reporting certainly need not be standardized at t̶h̶e̶ ̶l̶o̶c̶a̶l̶ [sic] a higher level.
by tptacek | 2025-06-20 00:20:57+00:00
You understand that it is a little difficult for people to take seriously a claim that you're interested in going back to the drawing board while at the same time very stridently arguing that hundreds of millions of dollars of work should go in to getting a 1994 protocol design from 4% deployment to 40% deployment. The time to return to the drawing board is now.
by throw234234234 | 2025-06-20 00:21:37+00:00
I will counter this with the fact that sometimes, and depending on the abstraction level that you are trying to solve/work at code or some other determinstic language is the right and easier way language to describe the context. This doesn't just apply to SWE, but all forms of engineering (electrical, civil, mechanical, etc).

We have math notation for maths, diagrams for circuits, plans for houses, etc etc. Would hate to have to give long paragraphs of "English" to my house builder and watch what the result could be. Feels like being a lawyer at this point. English can be appropriate and now we also have that in our toolbox.

Describing context at the abstraction level and accuracy you care about has always been the issue. The context of what matters though as you grow and the same system has to deal with more requirements at once together IMV is always the challenge in ANY engineering discipline.
by sherdil2022 | 2025-06-20 00:22:14+00:00
In the name of the queen and the crown, Britishers were involed in so many thefts (cultural artifacts for example - Kohinoor diamond anyone?), rapes, atrocities, massacres, genocide and more - and still had the gall call others as evil!

They divided many nations arbitrarily, not just India - and partitions of India and middle east caused the death of hundreds of thousands of people and the displacement of millions of people. We talk about holocaust a lot. But what Britishers did is no less evil.

Why isn’t that nation and the queen / crown held responsible? Such a shame.
by zhihaojia | 2025-06-20 00:22:26+00:00
JAX's operator fusion (https://apxml.com/courses/advanced-jax/chapter-2-optimizing-...) can fuse a few local operators (e.g., matmul and elementwise computation) into a single kernel. But JAX's approach cannot fuse an entire LLM with hundreds of operators into a single kernel because many operators involve loop transformations.

MPK takes a different approach where instead of incrementally fusing local operators, it decomposes operators into a task graph and builds a runtime system within a single kernel to execute all tasks specified in the task graph.
by throw0101d | 2025-06-20 00:22:39+00:00
> […] since IPv6 is approaching half of all traffic, more in many areas, the humor value is limited.

And yet every article on IPv6 has entire brigades of folks of folks going on about IPv6 is DOA, and "I've been here about it for thirty years, where is it?", and "they should have done IPv4 just with larger addresses, adoption would have been much faster and more compatible".

I'm simply pointing out the parallel argument that was made between DNSSEC and IPv6.
by jongjong | 2025-06-20 00:23:26+00:00
We don't technically need ICANN the whole DNS system anymore.

Anyone could quickly build a public cryptographically secure blockchain-based DNS system where people could optionally sync and query their own nodes (without even going over the wire). People could buy and own their domain names on-chain using cryptocurrency instead of repeatedly renting them from some centralized entity.

You could easily build this today by creating a Chrome Extension with a custom URL/address bar which bypasses the main one and makes a call to blockchain nodes instead of a DNS resolver; it would convert a domain name into an IP address by looking up the blockchain. This system could scale without limit in terms of reads as you can just spin up more nodes.

I mean it'd be so easy it's basically a weekend project if you use an existing blockchain as the base. Actually Ethereum already did something like this with .ETH domains but I don't think anyone built a Chrome Extension yet; or at least I haven't heard, though it's possible to enable in Brave browser via settings (kind of hidden away). Also, there is Unstoppable Domains.
by kbolino | 2025-06-20 00:23:52+00:00
It seems that posits have a value called NaR ("not a real") which serves the purpose of all the special values (including both infinities) in IEEE floats. There are some key differences though:

NaR (posits) NaN (floats) ------------ ------------ one bit pattern many different bit patterns always equal to itself never equals itself less than all other values falsifies all orderings
by acdha | 2025-06-20 00:25:42+00:00
I don’t know that I’ve read much support for “entirely happy” but the key difference is that DNSSEC is much harder to upgrade. You didn’t need to wait for my ISP to upgrade their DNS server before you could stop using PKCS12, and you definitely didn’t need me to upgrade my operating system.

The most important work to put in isn’t tweaking DNSSEC but changing it from the pre-PC Internet model where everyone completely trusted their network operators – pushing signature validation out to the client and changing the operating system APIs to make better user interfaces possible.
by 1oooqooq | 2025-06-20 00:25:55+00:00
every single ISP in the world. it was a well documented abused channel.

they not only intercepted your traffic for profiling but also injected redirects to their branded search. honestly curious if you're just too young or was one of the maybe 10 people who never experienced this.

sending traffic to a third party like quad9 is much safer than to a company who have your name/address/credit card.
by heterodoxlib | 2025-06-20 00:25:59+00:00
I'm here trying to understand your and others' perspectives. I appreciate that this is a sensitive topic for you and many others, which is why I'm trying very hard to be careful in my framing. I'm sorry if I failed in that.

With regard to my comment history: yes. Similar to OP at the root of the thread, I created this account specifically to ask questions that I have about our collective approach to helping trans people in need. At the time I wrote that other comment 9 months ago I had concerns about feeling shut out of the progressive movement entirely because I have doubts about some of its principles. Today I'm here to try to understand better why those principles are so ironclad.

I want to help make a difference in people's lives, but I live in a deep red state and know intimately what kinds of rhetoric would work to accomplish which ends. I want to know what I can share with the fiercely conservative people around me that would best help people like you, and for that I need to understand your goals and needs.

I'm here trying to collect information to better understand people's perspectives on this topic, and so I really do appreciate your feedback. It sounds like for you reducing the rigidity of the binary and freeing up people to be male or female in whatever way works best for them would not be sufficient, and that's good to know. Thank you.
by benkaiser | 2025-06-20 00:26:33+00:00
This is super nice as it's a native unencumbered linux environment.

I recently blogged about trying to do web development on the Quest 3, and although it kind of works, it's way more hacky (and performance is still lacking). The nice thing however about the Quest, is still being able to leverage virtual window placement in the space around you vs. the fixed 2d monitor approach here.

https://benkaiser.dev/web-development-in-vr/
by fedorareis | 2025-06-20 00:26:54+00:00
> I use the reliable mode for sending client inputs to the server: the server needs to be able to recalculate the state of the game reliably, and it's not acceptable for some client inputs to get “lost”. This may cause a bit of latency, and a bit more work for the server, which will have to “rewind” the game a bit further if an input arrives very late, but that's the price to pay for a stable game.

Maybe I’m missing something, but wouldn’t you either want the input to drop or the rewind to not happen at some point? If my network is extremely laggy when I’m playing a multiplayer game I would expect that my attempt to hit an opponent wouldn’t still succeed 1+ seconds later when they have already moved and are no longer in a position to be hit.
by drdaeman | 2025-06-20 00:27:59+00:00
If we're thinking cyberpunk, then the solution should also be in style. Say, if in some hypothetical future it becomes a commonplace way of tracking customers, replacing modern radio beacon tracking tech - how about personal privacy preserving devices that'll constantly spray out tons of random DNA samples (probably crowdsourced), drowning any attempts to analyze anything in the noise?
by retRen87 | 2025-06-20 00:28:22+00:00
Oh this is a great breakdown, I totally agree. I feel there’s a morality hierarchy that’s akin to Maslow’s hierarchy of needs.

People benefit from a sense of a family, a sense of community. It helps us feel more secure, both personally and to our loved ones.

I think the more I view things through this lenses the downstream benefits I see.