MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by magnuspaaske | 2025-06-15 18:28:38+00:00
There are people who use pyrolysis to turn left over biomass to biochar which can then be added to the soil and, depending on your energy use for other things, can turn the process carbon net negative. It is a roundabout way to sequester carbon though as you need to consider the opportunity cost of doing other things with the land (like leaving it for nature to take over and sequester carbon that way).

It's always worth being sceptical about some of these claims about processes magically being carbon net negative since cleaning up the atmosphere might not actually be what's paying the bills leading to inherent conflicts between selling a product (ethanol) and doing an environmental service. Switching to EVs will allow you to use much less land to fuel the cars with wind or solar energy and then the leftover land can be used for carbon sequestration and rewilding/biodiversity projects where that's the sole focus of the operation.
by boredemployee | 2025-06-15 18:29:56+00:00
There was a game from that Red Hat era that I loved so much, I *think* it was in Red Hat in that same period. It was a really simple adventure game in 2d, you could play in a window after typing/entering startx. But can't remember the name, I was 12 and it seems today like I dreamt about the game lol.

Would appreciate if anyone remembers it!
by boredemployee | 2025-06-15 18:29:59+00:00
There was a game from that Red Hat era that I loved so much, I **think** it was in Red Hat in that same period. It was a really simple adventure game in 2d, you could play in a window after typing/entering startx. But can't remember the name, I was 12 and it seems today like I dreamt about the game lol.

Would appreciate if anyone remembers it!
by nullc | 2025-06-15 18:30:56+00:00
The np-completeness of it is often not very relevant for practical concerns, as the parent post was mentioning.

There are many applications with an underlying technically np-complete problem for which optimal solutions are easily found for almost all instances you will encounter. Because they are np-complete it's possible to construct instances which aren't efficiently solvable, but that doesn't mean you'll ever even encounter one in practice.

Then even beyond that there are plenty of cases where an efficient approximation with bounded error exists, and that bounded error might be arbitrarily small.

To give an easily understood example, consider a knapsack problem where the items are never larger than 1% of the knapsack size.

There exists a trivial O(N log N) approximation algorithm: sort by value per size, include in that order until no more fit. This yields an optimal solution when the last selected item exactly fills the sack, and otherwise it yields an approximate solution which is suboptimal by no more than the unfilled space, which is no more than 1% due to the size constraint. And 1% is the worse case approximation error, normally less space will be unused and the lowest value per space will be a fraction of the highest value per space, so the actual average approximation error in a real application may be, say, 0.01%. If some other application constraint meant the item sizes would always add up to the sack size then the simple algorithm always gives an optimal solution.

Of course, you can do better than the simple algorithm with some search but even the dumbest algorithm gives very good approximations and is sometimes optimal... and yet the general knapsack (even just the decision form) is a problem which is np-complete. This insight can be quite surprising to anyone who assumes np-complete == unsolvable.

Complexity theory is awesome but it can also lead us astray.
by softsound | 2025-06-15 18:31:41+00:00
Wildfires are worse in areas where the wrong type of trees were planted as well which is common in logging areas or places cheaply "reforested" that don't do much research on what should be growing there. Wildfires themselves aren't bad per say either as certain trees only grow from fires. Not to say that climate change isn't a factor though, but there are a lot of varibles too.
by reliablereason | 2025-06-15 18:32:02+00:00
You say sugar, but are you referring to glucose or fructose?

There is a meaningful amount of scientific literature connecting fructose and inflammation.

The AVERAGE human can only digest about 30g of fructose a day. Some substantially more, some substantially less.

A can of soda or three apples is about 30g of fructose.

Inflammation (high- and low grade)then being a second step linking to anxiety.
by whitehexagon | 2025-06-15 18:32:03+00:00
I seem to recall my first RH install/live demo, was a cover disc from one of the comp mags at the time. I guess these days the disc would just have an unlock code for a vast download, followed by another vast download to update.

>From switching on, I can get to the 1998 GNOME desktop in two to three seconds, whereas with a recent kernel and KDE it takes thirty

This is what I miss. I remember installing my first SSD and thinking thank goodness I am back down to 6s boot times, but it didnt last long. Although Asahi on my M1 is feels just about fast enough that I do a complete shutdown after each use.
by sorcerer-mar | 2025-06-15 18:32:35+00:00
There are no such considerations in the US Constitution.

As an American, I have a right to hear the speech of foreign students and citizens. The government does not have the power to prevent me from hearing what they have to say. Small or large scale does not matter.

Stanley v Georgia: "It is now well established that the Constitution protects the right to receive information and ideas... This right to receive information and ideas, regardless of their social worth is fundamental to our free society."

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/394/557/
by try_the_bass | 2025-06-15 18:32:38+00:00
> Closely related to this, I have been continually frustrated with the insistence of the left wing that it borders on immoral to take a job as a soldier, police officer, prison guard, or bailiff, and that there's no reason to raise any of their pay.

I've been thinking a lot about this same thing. I've seen a marked rise in the number of complaints about how "everyone in law enforcement is MAGA" and the like, and can't help but think: "this is what you wanted, right?"

There have been a lot of people trying really hard to make law enforcement (and adjacent roles) entirely unpalatable, and it appears they've been largely successful! I think what they failed to take into account is that they were only making those roles unpalatable tothose who already think like them in other ways, and forgot that there are a lot of people out there with fundamentally different beliefs who are not dissuaded by ACAB-adjacent arguments. Or, worse yet, are actively attracted to the way the role is being portrayed!

So in the end, it seems like they achieved their goals, but perhaps overlooked how those goals might have some unintended consequences.

I never really understood the argument, either. If you think policing is rife with prejudice and abuse of power, why are you trying to demonize the whole job? Why wouldn't you be signing up for it, instead? After all, if you think it's being done wrong, the best way to right that wrong is by doing it yourself and setting a better example.

I think the fact that people prefer to publicly demonize an entire thing, instead of doing the hard work of making it right, is one of the most insidious features of modern social media.
by onetimeusename | 2025-06-15 18:32:55+00:00
Nothing has changed except the standard for denial of entry has been broadened here. There's a long history of denying entry to people for what their views are, this isn't new at all. You can just do a search and find examples of white supremacists, and imams and Islamic scholars, as well as probably other groups being denied entry to not only the US but it happens in Europe too and it goes back across administrations. So in other words, it's not just under the current administration where your political views could get you denied entry to the US.
by fakedang | 2025-06-15 18:33:46+00:00
Because Iran is Shia and the rest of its neighbours are ruled by Sunnis. Some even have majority Shia populations that can be restive under a Sunni autocrat.

Even then, Iran still has strong ties with all of those neighbors. They trade actively, US sanctions be damned, and would pounce at the opportunity to invest in Iran if given the opportunity (Iran's industries are basically all owned by the Ayatollah and IRGC currently).
by socalgal2 | 2025-06-15 18:34:16+00:00
> If you ... are comfortable with building an SGD training loop from scratch in Python, being competitive in Kaggle competitions, using modern NLP and computer vision algorithms for practical problems, and working with PyTorch and fastai, then you will be ready to start the course.

...sigh...

Yes, they tell you do their first course but I have no confidence that one course in this stuff will make me "comfortable with building an SGD training loop from scratch in Python, being competitive in Kaggle competitions, using modern NLP and computer vision algorithms for practical problems, and working with PyTorch and fastai"
by ethbr1 | 2025-06-15 18:34:17+00:00
{Total demand for software} is oddly not being mentioned by most people in this thread.

First approximation, there are two AI coding futures:

1. AI coding increases software development productivity, decreasing the cost of software, stimulating more demand for the now more efficient development.

2. AI coding increases software development productivity such that the existing labor pool is too large for demand.

I'd hazard (1) in the short term and (2) in the long term.
by grishka | 2025-06-15 18:34:38+00:00
Because high-speed internet became omnipresent. The act of making a software release stopped having a cost associated with it, like having to print CDs and ship them to stores. Software transitioned from meaningful releases, each of which needed to be as bug-free as possible and had to be sold to users as a genuine meaningful upgrade, to this pathetic eternal beta we now have.

Also because everyone seems too scared to practice adversarial interoperability.

Also because SoCs are now a thing which allows unhackable secure boot and other DRM-like functionality that prevents people from modifying their own devices to act in their own interest, or, as is the case with Android devices, allows it but punishes the user for having gained full access to their own device.
by WarOnPrivacy | 2025-06-15 18:34:45+00:00
> that the US government has had this capability for decades now, with mass dragnet surveillance of all internet traffic.

This is an important point.

The Bush admin established systems to surveil ~everyone in the US (not suspected of a crime) in bulk. Bulk surveillance is the well known, core component of systems intended to harm people (in bulk).

This got a pass from Bush supporters (inc me at first). It got little-to-no strong pushback elsewhere.

The Obama admin massively expanded Bush era surveillance systems. This got a pass from nearly everyone (excepting a period after the Edward Snowden revelations).

Not holding a reasonable PotUS accountable - this gifts power to the unreasonable ones that follow.
by Ciunkos | 2025-06-15 18:35:00+00:00
Just assume every form on the Internet is being constantly filled with leaked or stolen data.

I am pretty sure they (the pissed of recipients) have never even visited your site. Their emails had been submitted by persistent fraud groups hammering every possible input 24/7 for their scam and spam ops. I observe such behavior on our apps and sites, even those that you would assume no one is even aware of.

Cloudflare’s Turnstile will help you block 90% of such threats, and the final solution is to double-confirm the subscription - this way you can be pretty sure subscribers are there willingly and have not been put in by crooks.

Nowadays, I would even ditch the email input and force “Subscribe with Google/Apple/xyz” via Oauth to completely mitigate this broken unauthorized newsletter subscription flow.
by Jtsummers | 2025-06-15 18:35:36+00:00
> I use "English Language" as a synonym for "Human Language".

That was unclear given you kept calling out English, and not natural or human language more broadly in the rest of your comment. But I'll go with it.

> all my words in the literal sense, everything I said is still literally true.

No, they aren't. You need to make a stronger case than "Because I declared it axiomatically true".

+ has become part of nearly every language already, what's the value of picking one word (add) from one language (English) to replace it? Or to be more generous to say that every language should substitute for + whatever their language's word is. Now they can't communicate without a translator. Or, they could just use + as has been done for centuries. Why make things harder on ourselves?
by rednafi | 2025-06-15 18:35:55+00:00
I never found the act of coding something profound. LLMs are just tools, like sed, awk, or xargs, albeit with more range.

So no, I don’t miss the days of dealing with some douchebag on Stack Overflow or some neckbeard on a random subreddit telling me to pick up different career. They can now die in peace with their “hard-earned KnOwleDgE.”

Fiddling with directory structures or bike shedding over linter configs never felt artistic to me. It just felt like getting overly poetic about doing bullshit. LLMs and agents are amazing at doing these grunt work.

I get that some folks see the hand of God in their dotfiles or get high off Lisp’s homoiconicity, but most folks don’t relate to that. I just wanna do my build stuff and have fun with the results—not get romantic about the grind. I’m glad LLMs made all my man page knowledge useless if it means I can do more in less time and spend that time on things I actually enjoy.
by wpm | 2025-06-15 18:36:45+00:00
I feel like this is every PC manufacturer except for maybe Framework. Lenovo, Dell, HP, Asus, MSI, their websites and product lines are all confusing piles.

Apple has its problems and their store page is getting worse, but at least most of their product lines are easy to grok configure.

I don’t need an MBA to know if it’s hard to buy something, people won’t be likely to.
by keernan | 2025-06-15 18:36:54+00:00
I've suffered with social anxiety for a very long time. Thirty years ago a doctor prescribed a MAOI which immediately transformed me into a social butterfly (which in hindsight was a very difficult transition). This forever proved to me what the doctor had told me: it is all about chemical balance in the brain.

The problem, of course, was the danger. I could die within minutes if I ate fermented food without taking the antidote I always carried. Problem with that was the risk was almost the same if I took the antidote if it wasn't needed.

I therefore only stayed on the meds for maybe 6 months (during which time I went from 150lbs to 225lbs).

I've never found an alternative substitute. I've taken meds that help lessen the anxiety, but never found anything else that literally changed who I was (making me an incredibly social person).

PS: I think it was Nardil. I wasn't having any issues with depression. The doctor was specializing social anxiety and in particular in the use of Nardil to help. He also told me that the chemical balance in my brain indicated that, without Nardil, I would almost certainly become a hermit in my 70s. I'm 72 and his prognosis was spot on.
by cjbgkagh | 2025-06-15 18:37:14+00:00
The most direct substitution was cheese, lactose does not appear to have the same effect on me as fructose or sucrose.

I mostly eat kale for vegetables, this also helps with subclinical insulin resistance and inflammation. I think roasting vegetables may end up being too sweet.

I did an extended 5 day water fast to kick start the microbiome changes I undertook it as an experiment and the effectiveness in lifting brain fog suggested that it likely had a microbiome component.
by fakedang | 2025-06-15 18:38:50+00:00
To be fair, nearly all superpowers and regional powers in the world currently have poor relations with their neighbors lol.

USA? Check (the new entrant). China? Check. Russia? Check. India? Check. Japan? Check (too few neighbors though) Iran? Check. Israel? Check. EU? Check. Saudi Arabia? An exception. Brazil? Another exception. UK? Check. (lol)
by mewpmewp2 | 2025-06-15 18:39:28+00:00
I kind of agree, but why do I need to exist? Or what am I? Or who are you? Is it because if I or you didn't exist there wouldn't be as much motivation to look for answers and answers move us forward? Couldn't this motivation have been just there? Are we illusions to ourselves just because that is the thing that would yield in most motivation and intelligence possible?

Like sure, we can build the perfect AI that is as capable as we are, I don't see why it would have to have this odd experience as you and I have. It seems like it should be able to get by with a much more straightforward reward system. If consciousness is a reward system.
by gnabgib | 2025-06-15 18:39:53+00:00
Discussion (39+11+21 points, 2 months ago, 7+5+5 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43800623 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43729896 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43720535

Related: China to Build Thorium Molten-Salt Reactor in 2025 (148 points, 5 months ago, 135 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42554008
by bluefirebrand | 2025-06-15 18:40:25+00:00
> Increased productivity is in fact a _requirement_ for wages to go up

No it isn't. This is an extremely naive understanding of how any of this works

You even say it yourself, with the silly graph you keep posting

That graph doesn't show productivity it just shows "real inflation adjusted wages", like you keep harping on about.

But in general a person is not increasing their productivity year over year. So why would their wage go up to match inflation if, as you say, wages only go up when productivity increases? That doesn't make sense

The reality is that people already provide their employers with vastly more productivity than they are paid for. Their employers are capturing the majority of the value from that productivity. If someone's wage goes up to match inflation, their productivity hasn't increased, inflation has increase the value of their current productivity

You seriously don't seem to understand how any of this works
by MarkusQ | 2025-06-15 18:41:38+00:00
Which is to say, maladaptive. Despite all the people wishing evolution worked at the group level, it doesn't. Groups don't have offspring, individuals do, and thus things that are bad for the individual are extinguished regardless of their effect on the group.

If you look closely enough, even individuals aren't the true units of evolution, for the same reason; competing alleles is where the real action is.
by collingreen | 2025-06-15 18:41:53+00:00
This is an interesting comment! There are a few implications tucked together here that made me think.

Forgive me if I'm missing your intent(s) but the way I'm reading your comment it seems to be implying "the logical conclusion of that line of thinking is a worse situation so the logic is wrong or should be ignored".

Which implies that not being extinct is the most important thing even if life is completely suffering.

(It also implies a false dichotomy where the only two options are the horrible suffering of modern factory farming or extinction, with no options in between.)

I have an earnest question about your opinion, without casting any judgement or gotchas about any real world complicated situations:

In a hypothetical world where horrible factory farming is the only possible life for these chickens (the ONLY alternative is extinction) do you think it is worse to keep the system going than letting them go extinct? I think that's the intent in your comment and, if so, would you mind sharing a bit more about why you think that?
by suzzer99 | 2025-06-15 18:41:55+00:00
> Feels like we're heading towards a world where computer languages disappear, and we just use human language to tell machines what to do.

I agree, but it feels like we need a new type of L_X_M. Like an LBM (Large Behavior Model), which is trained on millions of different actions, user flows, displays, etc.

Converting token weights into text-based code designed to ease the cognitive load on humans seems wildly inefficient compared to converting tokens directly into UI actions and behaviors.
by thomassmith65 | 2025-06-15 18:41:57+00:00
After I posted this comment, I searched. Reuters disagrees with my explanation. They attribute 'rising lion' only to a biblical verse about 'the strength and power of Israel':

https://reuters.com/world/middle-east/israel-takes-name-iran...

My explanation makes more sense but Reuters, one hopes, knows more about the situation than I do.
by _0xdd | 2025-06-15 18:42:09+00:00
Good times. My first Linux distribution was a copy of RH 6.1 that my parents bought me from OfficeMax. They weren’t too thrilled when I nuked the MBR on our family’s Windows 98 box, but they’ve subsequently benefitted from nearly 30 years of free tech support haha. Took me another year or so before I finally got X working on our Dell laptop, because I had to install a patched X server to work with its Rage Mobility graphics card. I remember thinking that my keyboard was broken because `su` didn’t echo my password back out to the console. We all have to start somewhere, and the manuals that came with that install were priceless to me.
by ddingus | 2025-06-15 18:42:17+00:00
Great skill building times!

I bought Redhawks 5.2 or .3 in the big box, bought the Linux Bible and went to town.

Was running Sgi IRIX full time back then. When Linux booted, I had two thoughts!

(Glances at spiffy Sgi Indigo Magic Desktop)

1) Hoo Boy, we have a long way to go

, and

2) YES, a lot is possible today!

Good times.