MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by kelseyfrog | 2025-06-19 21:46:42+00:00
That's one way to think of it, but the root of it (imho) is a mismatch between ones internal sense of inalienable gender identity and the embodiment of that identity physically - think clothing, bodily form, social perception, etc.

It might be difficult to imagine how those two things are separable if one has lived their whole life with them in congruence. If perhaps, you close your eyes and concentrate on your being, there is a part of you that feels that your sense of manness of womanness is part of who you are? What would you do if you retained that sense, and woke up in the body of the opposite sex and were expected to behave in congruence with that contrary to your internal sense of self? It can be a bit like that.
by mananaysiempre | 2025-06-19 21:47:08+00:00
Ah. Yes, OK, I sympathize with this sentiment but also feel it’s something of a lost cause for mass-produced keyboards. As far as Ctrl moving from one position to another, from what I can find it’s more that the two options coexisted for while, and eventually the current (and arguably worse) one outcompeted the other.

Specifically:

- The ADM-3A[1] (mid ’70s) had Ctrl above Shift and apparently no Caps Lock.

- The Lisp machines[2,3] (late ’70s to mid ’80s) had Ctrl below Shift and Rub Out above Shift.

- The IBM 3270 series (from the early ’70s onwards) terminals (those that were capable of lower-case input) are pictured in Wikipedia[4] with a Caps Lock above Shift and no Ctrl (which agrees with their input model) but I get the impression that IBM produced a bajillion keyboard variations for these.

- The Model F variants for the XT and the AT (first half of the ’80s) has Ctrl above left Shift, Alt below it, and Caps Lock below right Shift[5], as well as 5×2 function keys on the left and no separate arrow keys; the later Model M variants (1985 onwards) use the modern layout; yet once again, looking at the separate pages for the Model F and the Model M, I get the impression that IBM simply produced a bajillion different versions of them.

- The ANSI standard to which the appellation of “ANSI layout” refers is ANSI X3.154-1988, so presumably things had settled by then?..

[1] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Adm3aimage.jpg

[2] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Space-cadet.jpg

[3] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Symbolics-keyboard.j...

[4] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:IBM-3279.jpg

[5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_PC_keyboard#Keyboard_layou...
by xp84 | 2025-06-19 21:47:13+00:00
I could be wildly off-base, but I wonder if some of these systems are airgapped, and the only way the data comes off of the closed system is via printing, to avoid someone inserting a flash drive full of malware in the guise of "copying the CSV file." Obviously there are or should be technical ways to safely extract data in a digital format, but I can see a little value in the provable safety that airgapping gives you.
by yaxu | 2025-06-19 21:47:49+00:00
I've worked with groups of 8 year olds and got them performing music together in less than an hour with tidal (strudel's older sibling). It's not easier than learning to play a drum but it's not really harder either.

It's nothing like trying to teach kids an imperative programming language, it's not really in the same category as general purpose programming. It's designed for music making and you can make complex rhythms very quickly out of very simple parts.
by acdha | 2025-06-19 21:48:12+00:00
That quote is interesting because all of the period reporting I’ve seen says that the attackers did NOT successfully get an HTTPS certificate and the only people affected were those who ignored their browsers’ warnings.

https://doublepulsar.com/hijack-of-amazons-internet-domain-s...

https://blog.cloudflare.com/bgp-leaks-and-crypto-currencies/
by phendrenad2 | 2025-06-19 21:48:40+00:00
> You might not want to leave Debian (which is fundamentally people) in the lurch over a security issue, but if a corporation shows up with a security issue, well, you tap the sign.

I think that many people have done this, and all of them were deposed and replaced with someone who would "play ball" (I.E., work for free). Go ahead, keep an eye on Libxml2, we'll either see this reversed, or we'll see libxml3 promoted from all angles and libxml2 decried as "deprecated".

Note that if that happens, it doesn't mean libxml2 is actually bad, it just means that it no longer fits the needs of the corporate overlords, and they need YOU to believe that it's no longer good so you won't waste their time with support requests.
by throwaway314155 | 2025-06-19 21:49:01+00:00
A fair point I suppose. I'm not entirely inexperienced with it, but it does sound like you have more experience with it than I do.

> you wouldn't notice if you're just opining on it as opposed to coding against it

Maybe i'm being sensitive but that is perhaps not the way I would have worded that as it reads a bit like an insult. Food for thought.
by pazimzadeh | 2025-06-19 21:49:03+00:00
> It’s as if I took the entire volumetric representation of the space around me and increased the degree to which every point within that could influence the location of every other point, recursively. This allows everything to elastically settle into a more harmonious equilibrium.

What does this mean? There has to be a simpler way to get this idea across..

> Perhaps taste could be built out of something like dyadic vibrations, tuned by evolution towards consonance or dissonance in order to generate an attractive or aversive response in the organism?

Same here
by jacobgkau | 2025-06-19 21:49:08+00:00
> In the past we had JPG our PNG: life was good. Simple. Easy.

Except for if you wanted a compressed image with transparency for the web, in which case you had to sacrifice one of those two things or use a different format besides those two.

> Then dumbfucks decided that it made sense to cram both lossy and lossless under the same umbrella.

> I don't understand the level of confusion and cluelessness that had to happen for such a dumb choice to have been made.

Besides many end users not caring which one it is as long as they recognize the file type and can open it, I found a few interesting reasons for having both in the same format from a simple web search. One was the possibility of having a lossy background layer with a lossless foreground layer (particularly in an animation).

JPEG XL also decided to support either lossless or lossy compression, so it wasn't just WebP that decided it made sense.
by tptacek | 2025-06-19 21:49:11+00:00
They definitely believe we should hasten deployment of DNSSEC --- read across the thread. For instance: Slack was taken down for a half a day owing to a deployment of DNSSEC that a government contract obligated them to undertake, and that commenter celebrated the contract.

It's fine that we all agree on some things and disagree on others! I don't think DNS security is a priority issue, but I'm fine with it conceptually. My opposition is to the DNSSEC protocol itself, which is a dangerous relic of premodern cryptography designed at a government-funded lab in the 1990s. The other commenter on this thread disagrees with that assessment.

slightly later

(My point here is just clarity about what we do and don't agree about. "Resolving" this conflict is pointless --- we're not making the calls, the market is. But from an intellectual perspective, understanding our distinctive positions on Internet security, even if that means recognizing intractable disputes, is more useful than just pretending we agree.)
by polskibus | 2025-06-19 21:49:30+00:00
So explicit model description (kind of repeating the schema into explicit model definition) provides better results when used with LLM because it’s closer to the business domain(or maybe the extra step from DDL to business model is what confuses the LLM?). I think I’m failing to grasp why does this approach work better than straight schema fed to Llm.
by tln | 2025-06-19 21:49:54+00:00
The search was "ai tokens per tonne co2" and the "1000 tokens emits 8.3g CO2" bit was my paraphrasing from the AI overview.

This article [0] mentions "8.3g CO2" but it's linked source [1] uses a different number - 4.32g. Perhaps revised after publication.

I ran the search again and got different numbers... I'm sure the real numbers will be changing quite a bit over time too.

[0] https://ditchcarbon.com/blog/llm-carbon-emissions

[1] https://smartly.ai/blog/the-carbon-footprint-of-chatgpt-how-...
by jiggawatts | 2025-06-19 21:51:13+00:00
I just realised that this is probably a side-effect of a faulty training regime. I’ve heard several industry heads say that programming is “easy” to generate synthetic data for and is also amenable to training methods that teach the AI to increase the pass rate of unit tests.

So… it did.

It made the tests pass.

“Job done boss!”
by throwaway314155 | 2025-06-19 21:51:23+00:00
Fair enough. I went to public school and (I believe) more people do in general. In my particular public school it was frowned upon to brag about your privilege as many had less fortunate upbringings. Mind you, this was still in a (relatively) affluent area - so general amenities were okay but many people still didn't come from extravagant or even mild wealth.

Excessive privilege really fucks with people's worldview.
by tptacek | 2025-06-19 21:51:35+00:00
What's more, it's a software-only infrastructure upgrade: it wouldn't, in the simplest base case, require zone owners to reconfigure their zones, the way DNSSEC does. It doesn't require policy decisionmaking. DNS infrastructure operators could just enable it, and it would work --- unlike DNSSEC.

(Actually getting it to work reliably without downgrade attacks would be more work, but notably, that's work DNSSEC would have had to do too --- precisely the work that caused DANE-stapling to founder in tls-wg.)
by Retric | 2025-06-19 21:52:22+00:00
> no free will

That always seemed like a meaningless argument to me. To an outside observer free will is indistinguishable from a random process over some range of possibilities. You aren’t going to randomly go to sleep with your hand in a fire, there’s some hard coded biology preventing that choice but that only means human behavior isn’t completely random, hardly a groundbreaking discovery.

At the other end we have no issues making an arbitrary decision where there’s no way to predict what the better choice is. So what exactly does free will bring to the table that we’re missing without it? Some sort of mystical soul, well what if that’s also deterministic? Unpredictability is useful in game theory, but computers can get that from a hardware RNG based on quantum processes like radioactive decay, so it doesn’t mean much.

Finally, subjectively the answer isn’t clear so what difference does it make?
by stonogo | 2025-06-19 21:52:46+00:00
The assertion that "actual intelligence is hard to know" followed almost immediately by "apparent genetic heritage" is what's wrong with your opinion. And no, it doesn't work -- at least it doesn't work for identifying intelligence. It just works for selecting people who appeal to your bias.

IQ tests are not actual measurements of anything; this is both because nobody has a rigorous working definition of intelligence and because nobody's figured out a universal method of measuring achievement of what insufficient definitions we have. Their proponents are more interested in pigeonholing people than actually measuring anything anyway.

And as a hiring manager, I'd hire an idiot who is good at the job over a genius who isn't.
by wizzwizz4 | 2025-06-19 21:52:48+00:00
Your treatment of IQ is ridiculous. Give me access to a child for seven months, and I can increase their IQ score by 20 (and probably make myself an enemy in the process: IQ test drills are one of the dullest activities, since you can't even switch your brain off while doing them).

Intelligence is not a single axis thing. IQ test results are significantly influenced by socioeconomic factors. "Actual intelligence is hard to know" because it doesn't exist.

I have never yet known scientific racism to produce true results. I have known a lot of people to say the sorts of things you're saying: evidence-free claims that racism is fine so long as you're doing the Good Racism that Actually Works™, I Promise, This Time It's Not Prejudice Because It's Justified®.

No candidate genetic correlate of the g factor has ever replicated. That should be a massive flashing warning sign that – rather than having identified an elusive fact about reality that just so happens to not appear in any rigorous study – maybe you're falling afoul of the same in-group/out-group bias as nearly every group of humans since records begin.

Since I have no reason to believe your heuristic is accurate, we can stop there. However, to further underline that you're not thinking rationally: even if blue people were (on average) 2× as capable at spacial rotation-based office jobs than green people, it still wouldn't be a good idea to start with the skin colour prior and update from there, because that would lead to the creation of caste systems, which hinder social mobility. Even if scientific racism worked (which it hasn't to date!), the rational approach would still be to judge people on their own merits.

If you find it hard to assess the competence of your subordinates, to the point where you're resorting to population-level stereotypes to make hiring decisions, you're an incompetent manager and should find another job.
by FirmwareBurner | 2025-06-19 21:52:54+00:00
> they eventually lost their appreciation for the artistic side of the discipline

It's easy to obsess with the artistic side of the discipline when you're doing it on someone else's money and assume it's coming from an infinite bag.

Once you are a manager and given limited resources to get a job done by a certain date, art goes out the window and it's all about efficiency, you get paid to get the job done, not have pretty code.

I think people focusing on SW engineering being art have been spoiled by only working at companies with infinite money, like Google, who treat work as play in hopes that 1 in a million toys will be the next billion dollar idea. But open your own shop, get customers, hire people and let's see how much you'll care about their work being art VS efficient, when it's your dime on the line, then you'll embrace and understand the managerial mindset you've despised.
by alwa | 2025-06-19 21:53:10+00:00
I also feel like I’ve seen a lot more of these over the past week or two, whereas I don’t remember noticing it at all before then.

It feels like it’s become grabbier and less able to stay in its lane: ask for a narrow thing, and next thing you know it’s running hog wild across the codebase shoehorning in half-cocked major architectural changes you never asked for. [Ed.: wow, how’s that for mixing metaphors?]

Then it smugly announces success, even when it runs the tests and sees them fail. “Let me test our fix” / [tests fail] / [accurately summarizes the way the tests are failing] / “Great! The change is working now!”
by pyridines | 2025-06-19 21:53:34+00:00
Another American holiday coming up with an equally useless name is Fourth of July. Nobody seems to have a problem with that name, and nobody I know calls it Independence Day. Neither Fourth of July or Juneteenth are great names out of context, but they both have histories behind them and can't be changed anymore.

Heck, Juneteenth is a better name, since it is not literally month+day.
by notepad0x90 | 2025-06-19 21:53:45+00:00
Nah, if your freespeech involves treason and rebellion you no longer have rights.

No, "worse" meant capital punishment (the universal punishment for that crime). The only good traitor is a dead traitor. Don't betray your country. Don't fly the flags of its enemies. I am fine with a moderate punishment (1-2 years in prison), I just expected society to treat it with the seriousness it deserves.

If you conspire to kill someone or rob a bank, that's a conspiracy charge. if you run around dressed and armed like a militia and wearing confederate flags, threatening race wars, then it's free speech. that makes no sense.

This isn't an unpopular sentiment outside the US as you think. I like germany's approach to the problem. the punishment isn't severe but just enough. Try the nazi salute in germany or flying the nazi flag and you'll see what happens.

Your argument is a logical fallacy (slipperly slope). No, I am not suggesting arbitrary banning of arbitrary symbols and flags I dislike, there is no slippery slope. If an entity is declared an enemy of the united states by the democratically elected government of the united states, then you don't get to fly its flags on american soil without consequence. You don't get to fly ISIS or al-qaeda flags just the same as confederate and nazi flags. I am not against flying random KKK or white supremacist flags (well I am, I just don't think that should be illegal). Displaying symbols or making speech in advocacy of a declared enemy of your country shouldn't be legal.

If the checks and balances of government allow Trump to declare an entity enemy of the state then yeah, you can't fly their flags either. That's how democracy works, don't elect people who are not trustworthy. The constitution is not a religion and freedom of speech means nothing without a stable country to administer it.

Being intolerant to some speech is necessary for the preservation of free speech. Free speech doesn't mean you get to say anything without consequence (can't yell fire in a crowd, I'd say rebellion is worse than that!).

Treason and rebellion is worse than mass murder! that's our disconnect. you see it as an opinion, I see it as something so horrific that I wouldn't be all that upset if the person's precious life (and even in case of murder I don't support capital punishment, except for extreme cases) was taken from them. War and the death of millions of innocents is what I equate treason and rebellion with, and not just death but so much human suffering that lasts decades (see the misery of post-civil-war reconstruction!).
by lukev | 2025-06-19 21:54:26+00:00
Did you discover it from first principles by yourself because it's a natural conclusion anyone would reach if they ponder the subject?

Or because western culture reflects this theme continuously through all the culture and media you've immersed in since you were a child?

Also the idea is definitely not new to Descartes, you can find echoes of it going back to Plato, so your idea isn't wrong per se. But I think it underrates the effect to which our philosophical preconceptions are culturally constructed.
by perching_aix | 2025-06-19 21:55:15+00:00
You remind me to all the shitty times in literature class where I had to rote memorize countless works from a given author (poet), think 40, then take a test identifying which poem each of the given quotes was from. The little WinForms app I wrote to practice for these tests was one of the first programs I've ever written. I guess in that sense it's also a fond memory. I miss WinForms.

Good thing they were public (?) works, wouldn't wanna get sued [0] for possibly being a two legged copyright infringement. Or should I say having been, since naturally I immediately erased all of these works from my mind just days after these tests, even without any legal impetus.

Edit: thinking about it a bit more, you also remind me to our midterm tests from the same class. We had to produce multiple page long essays on the spot, analyzing a select work... from memory. Bonus points for being able to quote from it, of course. Needless to say, not many original thoughts were featured in those essays, not in mine, not in others' - the explicit expectation was that you'd peruse the current and older textbooks to "learn (memorize) the analysis" from, and then you'd "write about it in your own words", but still using technical terms. They were pretty much just tests in jargon use, composition, and memorization, which is definitely a choice of all time for a class on literature. But I think it draws an interesting perspective. At no point did we ever have to actually demonstrate a capability in literary analysis of our own, or was that capability ever graded, for example. But if you only read our essays, you'd think we were great at it. It was mimicry. Doesn't mean we didn't end up developing such a capability though.

[0] https://youtu.be/-JlxuQ7tPgQ
by gpxyz | 2025-06-19 21:55:46+00:00
A couple years ago, I happened to overhear a conversation at lunch between two men I gathered were SpaceX engineers. (They were talking very loudly, so it was difficult not to listen in.) Rather than discuss the mission of the company, or anything that showed passion for their job, they instead spent most of the lunch talking about how they were making “day in the life” TikToks and were trying to increase their follower counts, then about how they would drive 150+mph to Vegas since they could afford any speeding ticket if they got pulled over. Really struck me as a red flag for the company that their employees were much more concerned about their own social status than anything they were working on. I suppose incidents like this may well be the result of these attitudes becoming commonplace.
by al_borland | 2025-06-19 21:55:46+00:00
I'm not a fan of sites that pretend to be a company, with a product/service coming in the near future, when it's nothing more than a pipe dream.

If the info on the website is the idea. It's way too expensive for the use cases listed. I don't think a robot can do most of the things listed, certainly not better than a human. I also don't need extensive training, and a few hours, to learn how to operate a human I hire, they presumably know more than me and I just point to the problem and they take care of it better than I could even explain.

So I can rent for up to 3 months, with a base cost of $1,042. Estimated price to buy my own starts at $25,000. Are people going to pay $93k to rent a $25k robot for 3 months?

You mention hacking the rented robot. That would certainly violate the terms of the rental would it not? How can a rental company send it into someone else's home when the person before spent their time doing who know's what to it's programming? That could be very dangerous.

The only way this works is for on-off specific tasks that the robot is purpose built for... like renting a carpet shampooer from the grocery store. Make Roomba version of a carpet shampooer and people will probably rent that for $60/day instead of the $40 for the manual one.
by ljm | 2025-06-19 21:56:21+00:00
I’ve been running k3s on hetzner for over 2 years now with 100% uptime.

In fact, it was so low maintenance that I lost my SSH key for the master node and I had to reprovision the entire cluster. Took about 90 mins including the time spent updating my docs. If it was critical I could have got that down to 15 mins tops.

20€/mo for a k8s cluster using k3s, exclusively on ARM, 3 nodes 1 master, some storage, and a load balancer with automatic dns on cloudflare.
by jcranmer | 2025-06-19 21:56:36+00:00
I'm sorry, this is just such an incredibly fine-tuned threat model for me to take it seriously.

You start with a BGP hijack, which lets you impersonate anybody, but assume that the hijacker is only so powerful as being able to impersonate a specific DNS server and not the server that the DNS server tells you about. You then use that specific control to get a CA to forge a certificate for you (and if the CA is capable of using any information to detect that this might be a forgery, the attack breaks).

And of course, the proposed solution doesn't do anything to protect against other kinds of DNS hijacking--impersonating somebody to the nameserver and getting the account switched over to them.