MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by DoctorOW | 2025-06-13 22:17:55+00:00
People love to point to EEE and say "Microsoft killed FOSS." It's the other way around, Microsoft saw marketshare increasing on desktop, with mobile bringing took a victory lap on desktop and started making Windows shittier with the idea that they have a monopoly. I think a lot of people in open source saw it, and knowing Microsoft as normally risk-averse just believed it's true. But, it's not. Linux is still going strong, both desktop and server.
by ahartmetz | 2025-06-13 22:18:22+00:00
Yes, sure! I am arguing for whatever is necessary to reduce the total compilation cost. Pruning headers, rearranging source code to have fewer trivial modules and to reduce the size of very often included headers, even gasp sometimes using pointers just to reduce compile time! I understand that runtime performance is a very high priority for Blink, but it really doesn't matter sometimes if certain things are heap-allocated. Like things that are very expensive to instantiate anyway and that don't occur often. These will incidentally tend to have "heavy" headers, too.
by kragen | 2025-06-13 22:18:27+00:00
I second the recommendation in Sir Whinesalot's post (which I haven't fully read yet) to look at miniKanren and microKanren. I found it extremely educational to port microKanren to OCaml a few years ago, and I think the result is somewhat more comprehensible than the original Scheme, though you'll still probably have to read the paper to understand it: http://canonical.org/~kragen/sw/dev3/mukanren.ml

The most astonishing result of miniKanren is a Scheme interpreter that you can run forwards, backwards, or both. http://webyrd.net/quines/quines.pdf demonstrates using it to generate a Scheme quine, that is, a Scheme program whose output when run is itself ("miniKanren, Live and Untagged: Quine Generation via Relational Interpreters (Programming Pearl)", Byrd, Holk, and Friedman).

§4.4 of SICP http://sarabander.github.io/sicp/html/4_002e4.xhtml also has an implementation of logic programming in Scheme which is extremely approachable.

Unlike the post, I don't think Datalog is the place to look for deep insights about logic programming. Instead, it's the place to look for deep insights about databases.
by ray_ | 2025-06-13 22:18:31+00:00
> The same pattern appears to be playing out with AI. While competitors race to stuff large language models into everything, Apple is taking a more measured approach. The Liquid Glass design language actually creates opportunities for more contextual AI interactions. Imagine smart suggestions that appear as translucent overlays, or AI-generated content that floats naturally over your existing workflow. The glass metaphor provides a visual framework for AI that feels ambient rather than intrusive.
by observationist | 2025-06-13 22:19:23+00:00
Looks like it may be the stability of the approach, avoiding alignment tax and model collapse.

I'd love to see a full circle of hypernetworks, with both models continuously updated through generated LoRAs, the hypernetwork updated to accommodate the new model state. You'd need a meta-hypernetwork to apply LoRAs to the hypernetwork, and then you could effectively have continuous learning.
by ml-anon | 2025-06-13 22:21:18+00:00
This is wrong. OpenAI has almost no upside now at these valuations and there is a >2 year effective cliff on any possibility of liquidity whereas Meta is paying 7-8 figures liquid.

Metas problem is that everyone knows that it’s a dumpster fire so you will only attract people who only care about comp which is typically not the main motivation for the best people.
by wk_end | 2025-06-13 22:22:24+00:00
The implication here, I think, is that "Jane Street has foolishly invested heavily into Ocaml and, rather than sensibly change course and migrate away, they continue to invest heavily into it in the hopes that one day the investment will pay off."

Which is a ridiculous take: Jane Street has done extraordinarily well for themselves, possibly at least in part because of their investment in Ocaml, and any sort of migration would be a huge undertaking, and an absurd and unnecessary risk.
by PaulKeeble | 2025-06-13 22:25:13+00:00
Its not the only disease this has happened to either. ME/CFS has been railroaded by European governments that funded only psychological research despite numerous pathological findings and better theories of the disease, this prejudiced treatment started in the 1970s and persists to this day including the corruption of the PACE trial results which researchers tried to hide the data of.

Research fraud in medicine is alarmingly common.
by zozbot234 | 2025-06-13 22:25:28+00:00
You could argue that the early constructivists' notions of "paradoxes" included things such as "statements about the existence of things that we don't know how to explicitly construct, and that may be even impossible to explicitly construct in the general case". Under Gödel's argument, these statements (like other classical statements) become mere negative statements asserting the non-existence of anything that might contradict the aforementioned non-constructive objects. So, they're no longer "paradoxical" in that sense. Stated another way, decidability/computability (perhaps relative to some appropriate oracle, to fully account for the surprising strength of some loosely-"constructive" principles) is not quite the same concern as consistency. Of course, this was all stated in very fuzzy and imprecise terms to begin with (no real notion back then of what "decidable" and "computable" might mean), so there's that.
by __MatrixMan__ | 2025-06-13 22:25:55+00:00
That's just because of how wikipedia pages are written:

> In classical physics and general chemistry, matter is any substance that has mass and takes up space by having volume...

It's common to name the school of thought before characterizing the thing. As soon as you hit an article that does this, you're on a direct path to philosophy, the grandaddy of schools of thought.

So far as I know, there isn't a corresponding convention that would point a chatbot towards Namaste
by seltzered_ | 2025-06-13 22:26:47+00:00
Something missing from this article is more depth into the issues of doing a webkit-based os back in the late 2000s/2010s, and this goes back to 2008. From https://web.archive.org/web/20140110095058/https://www.theve... (2012, theverge) :

"The way Simon and Grignon saw it, using pure HTML and JavaScript would have a few key advantages. One, it would allow large chunks of functionality to be implemented very quickly because the underlying standards were simple, straightforward, and widely understood. Two, Duarte was intrigued by the notion that his designers would be able to apply their handicraft to apps, screens, and UI elements without extensive assistance from engineers, all of whom had other things to worry about. And perhaps most appealing, WebKit already existed — Palm just had to port it.

Of course, it wasn't that simple. WebKit simply wasn't created for doing this kind of thing. No one working on the core WebKit project had a mobile device with limited RAM, processor, and battery in mind — certainly not for the entire user interface, anyway. Granted, Nokia and Apple had already ported WebKit for use in their mobile browsers at that point, but what Simon and Grignon were spitballing was a considerably more ambitious idea.

One weekend later, though, the two believed they'd cobbled together enough of a mockup to prove that Matias' vision could indeed be realized using nothing more than a web engine. They took the demo to software boss Mitch Allen; Rubinstein saw it not long after. Allen was impressed enough that Grignon was given approval to peel off ten staff members and crank for a month with the goal of bringing up WebKit and basic functionality on a very early prototype handset called "Floyd," essentially a modified Treo 800w"

[...]

"Prototypes of the original Pre first started showing up in Palm offices around April of 2008. Luna was far from perfect, especially running in just the 256 MB of RAM shipped with the original Pre. The system would regularly exhaust the limited space. To help speed things up, the Luna team had decided to port Google's high-performance V8 JavaScript engine, making Palm the first company to ship V8 on mobile"

[...]

"Mercer was shuffled into a new role looking for ways to optimize WebKit, but sources tell us that it quickly became apparent he was only using it to advance his cause: he'd created benchmark tool after benchmark tool showing that the web "wasn't ready for primetime" on mobile. And in a way, he was right — at that time, it wasn't ready for primetime, but Palm's engineers were on the bleeding edge trying to get it there. "It was obvious that this stuff was the future," one senior-level source told us. As the saying goes, they were trying to skate to where they believed the puck was going; Mercer was trying to skate to where it was."

It still feels wild to think of Palm attempting all this while Apple iOS ecosystem developers were generally writing code in Objective-C (Swift came out in 2014).
by btilly | 2025-06-13 22:27:38+00:00
I believe that you are misrepresenting Hilbert here.

If ZFC led to a result that doesn't agree with physical reality, Hilbert would not reject that result. Instead, at worst, he would simply move it from the category of being a real formula, to being an ideal formula. For example, Euclid's geometry doesn't agree with physical reality. Therefore it is an ideal formula, not a real formula. And yet we do not reject this geometry from mathematics.

But the distinction between real and ideal is a question for physics. It is not a question that mathematicians need worry about. The questions that mathematicians need worry about are entirely those which are internal to the formal game.
by imiric | 2025-06-13 22:27:41+00:00
This is the same catch-22 LLMs have had since their inception. They're only useful for domain experts who can review their output. Any non-experts using them will never become experts, because they're expecting the LLM to do the job for them. Unless they use the tool as an assistant that explains the underlying concepts, which can also be wrong, and they do the bulk of the work themselves, their skills will stagnate or deteriorate.
by mnahkies | 2025-06-13 22:29:07+00:00
I'm no expert, but I'd imagine privacy plays (or should play) a big role in this. I'd expect that compute costs mean any learning would have to be in aggregate rather than specific to the user which would then risk leaking information across sessions very likely.

I completely agree that figuring out a safe way to continually train feels like the biggest blocker to AGI
by chimeracoder | 2025-06-13 22:30:33+00:00
Did you try searching for it? The first result on Google for "daringfireball.net flat design 2013" is https://daringfireball.net/2013/01/the_trend_against_skeuomo...

Tack on site:news.ycombinator.com, and you'll find the top comment too: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5081618
by socalgal2 | 2025-06-13 22:31:15+00:00
Not the same but related? Powers of 10 by Eames

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0fKBhvDjuy0

Interestingly, that Hawking visualization makes all the same affordances mentioned in the 1 pixel visualization. They show the earth and moon to scale, then the video shows an aerial view with all the planets much too large. Jupiter is 2x the size of the sun. Saturn and its rings 2x that.
by tlogan | 2025-06-13 22:34:38+00:00
I worked closely with SAP engineers throughout the 1990s and 2000s. In my experience, the company began to significantly decline after Leo Apotheker assumed leadership.

While Henning may not have been particularly business-savvy, Leo demonstrated a fundamental lack of understanding of SAP’s value network and how software should be build. He was just a money guy.
by swat535 | 2025-06-13 22:34:43+00:00
Adguard for Safari is excellent, it can be combined with Vinegar and Baking Soda:

Baking Soda: https://apps.apple.com/ca/app/baking-soda-tube-cleaner/id160...

Vinegar: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/vinegar-tube-cleaner/id1591303...

Adguard pro: https://adguard.com/en/adguard-ios-pro/overview.html
by myvoiceismypass | 2025-06-13 22:34:45+00:00
This was an offer to non HP folks as well - if you were an established developer, you could get a free Pre2. I was a recipient of said free device, but I did have several legit apps in the store because honestly WebOS was really fun to write code for! Their developer relations were excellent for a while - it was a really fun community to be part of for a bit. Shout out to Chuq, he was great.
by 1vuio0pswjnm7 | 2025-06-13 22:35:00+00:00
Curious if 127.127.127.127 passes or fails the "ease of use" or "bad user experience" tests.

For example

cat > rinetd.conf <<eof logfile rinetd.log logcommon 127.127.127.127 53/udp 95.130.17.218 53/udp [timeout=3] eof rinetd -c rinetd.conf echo nameseserver 127.127.127.127 > /etc/resolv.conf drill example.com

https://github.com/samhocevar/rinetd
by amiga386 | 2025-06-13 22:35:05+00:00
It did fail, because as you see, that edit's track 5 says "Rainclous" ... but https://musicbrainz.org/edit/122458416 was in play to change that to "Raincloud"... so https://musicbrainz.org/edit/122458694 failed because two edits wanted to change the same medium at the same time.

They got the change made later in https://musicbrainz.org/edit/122791893
by IsTom | 2025-06-13 22:35:16+00:00
> In what sense can a finite set exist and be finite when it is unfindable, unverifiable, and has unboundable size?

The way I see it is that an existence of proof isn't required for something to be true. Something being true is a matter of the model, being provable is a matter of axioms and deduction rules. And there comes the distinction between ⊨ and ⊢.
by irq-1 | 2025-06-13 22:35:20+00:00
Consider pitching it as: use the same Word you always have, and use these additional tools (diff, go to, etc..).

I'd expect most firms to have their own systems for backup, versioning, access control, approval, metadata, etc.. or at least a human process for such. It should be much easier to sell the "extra tools" than software that changes their process.
by HaZeust | 2025-06-13 22:35:40+00:00
>"Israel is well past the point of international sanctions for their Gaza genocide, the west has another ace up their sleeve and could even promise to sanction Israel for their nuclear weapons program in return."

Given how gray this comment already is, I'm not afraid to go against what seems to be the HN-hivemind today: Good luck with that proposal, last week Rubio himself stated there's a no-tolerance policy for anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism, and such behavior can be the single determining factor against one's ability to legally migrate here. This administration is blindly pro-Israel, much to its detriment - and likely its battle between dovish and hawkish foreign policy; because they're damned either way.
by paxys | 2025-06-13 22:35:52+00:00
Nah they just joined the race too late. Remember that Steve Ballmer was laughing at and dismissing the iPhone when it launched ("it's too expensive, no one will use it, it doesn't even have a keyboard"). Microsoft continued pushing Windows Mobile at that time and even spent $1B+ acquiring Danger and releasing Kin (remember that disaster?). Then Windows Phone 7 finally launched in 2010 and was rebooted again in 2012 with Windows Phone 8. By that time the mobile OS market was a duopoly, and neither users nor developers nor manufacturers cared for a third platform.
by griffzhowl | 2025-06-13 22:37:32+00:00
> If for all n we can prove P(n), then `∀n P(n)` should be an acceptable proposition

But how can you prove that P(n) for all n without induction? Maybe I misinterpret what you're saying, or I'm naive about something in formal languages, but if we can prove P(n) for all n. then `∀n P(n)` just looks like a trivial transcription of the conclusion into different symbols.

I think the crux of the matter is that we accept inductive arguments as valid, and so we formalize it via the inductive axiom (of Peano arithmetic). i.e., we accept induction as a principle of mathematical reasoning, but we can't derive it from something else so we postualte it when we come around to doing formalizations. Maybe that's what you mean by it coming down to intuition, now that I reread it...

Poincaré has a nice discussion of induction in "On the nature of mathematical reasoning", reprinted in Benacerraf & Putnam Philosophy of Mathematics, where he explicates it as an infinite sequence of modus ponens steps, but irreducible to any more basic logical rule like the principle of (non-)contradiction
by brailsafe | 2025-06-13 22:38:21+00:00
Seems like you're conflating translucency and transparency, and Apple is being a bit imprecise with those terms too. As in, if you turn off what Apple is calling "transparency", is the interface still arguably "translucent" in the way that's implied by the Carmack quote, which I take to mean some Minority Report barely frosted-glass effect in the background.

> If I can see through it, it's transparent.

Yes, if you can clearly make out the details behind whatever it is you're looking through.

> If the color changes behind the thing, and I can somehow intuit that -- good chance's we're dealing with transparency.

This would normally be translucency, akin to a shower door or curtain that lets you see that someone is in there and maybe who, but not much more.

In this case though, it's a bit weird, and it seems like the person you responded to did have a relevant question, because as far as I've seen it's kind of pseudo-transparent but not quite translucent in different contexts, in the sense that you can more clearly see through to detail that's sometimes there (slider position, magnifying glass) and sometimes only derived from the bottom layer, like colors changing.

To me, it's less like a shower door vs window, and more like a window vs looking through the bottom of a shot glass, but im some cases closer to opaque than translucent if the transparent gimmick is turned off, based on how the question was asked.
by yencabulator | 2025-06-13 22:38:52+00:00
> I took me 15 years to realize that consumers themselves do not care about quality. Until they do, the minority of engineers who strive for it are gonna waste their efforts.

N=1 but I would personally pay $15 for a higher quality garden hose valve when the competition is <$10, but I typically can't because I have no way of knowing which one of the products marketed at me is the higher quality one. The worst case scenario for me is paying $15 for a bad quality product.

It's not that consumers don't want quality, it's that quality is hard to market.
by mrandish | 2025-06-13 22:38:53+00:00
> Translucent UI is usually a bad idea outside of movies and non-critical game interfaces.

Reading the article's claims about translucent UI being ideal for AR, all I could think about was how bad this roadside traffic sign would be if it was white text printed on translucent glass. https://images.app.goo.gl/MU4kJmWZ8ogNGAD9A

Assuming the information a daily-use AR headset is presenting is important, it needs to be instantly legible to be useful. I guess my counter to the article would be images of "Roadside traffic signs as re-imagined in Apple's Liquid Glass." Would showing an intersection with a Liquid Glass stop sign and a car crashed into the side of another be too much?
by rawgabbit | 2025-06-13 22:40:15+00:00
Apotheker was the product of HP’s incompetent board. The board fired Mark Hurd who had rescued the company after Carly Fiorina’s disastrous tenure. Hurd, was investigated for sexual harassment, found innocent, and fired for inappropriate expenses.

The board then hired Apotheker whose grand strategy was to sell everything including the printer business and buy Autonomy a hot British company. The board signed off on this. It is the equivalent of selling your farm and tractor for some magical beans.
by TMWNN | 2025-06-13 22:40:38+00:00
>It might not be stolen valor

It is, or isn't.

In this case, it ain't.

>but you just KNOW these guys are going to play up their veteran status

How do you have such a surplus of outrage, that you can freely spend it on something that so far has only happened in your mind?

>They're not even full time positions.

Yes, that's the definition of a reserve commission.
by duxup | 2025-06-13 22:40:39+00:00
>In reality, there is considerable evidence that reports of tanks killed by aircraft were greatly exaggerated by pilots of all nations in World War II. Operational research by teams on the ground tended to find that fewer than 10 percent of tank losses were attributable to air power.

I was glad to see this.

There was some research being done in Russia (before the latest conflicts with the west) where a lot of the traditional narratives about the East were being rethought. Including the scale of impact on tanks that the Il-2 had. When German tanks were destroyed an so on. Russian history as written and almost turned into mythology with massive battles an impressive numbers, but they just didn't jive with Russian and German ground level reports.
by Swizec | 2025-06-13 22:40:45+00:00
> Like humans talking about weather.

As someone who was always fascinated by weather, I dislike this characterization. You can learn so much about someone’s background and childhood by what they say about the weather.

I think the only people who think weather is boring are people who have never lived more than 20 miles away from their place of birth. And even then anyone with even a bit of outdoorsiness (hikes, running, gardening, construction, racing, farming, cycling, etc) will have an interest in weather and weather patterns.

Hell, the first thing you usually ask when traveling is “What’s the weather gonna be like?”. How else would you pack
by speakfreely | 2025-06-13 22:41:12+00:00
> The "just submit" ideology that people seem to be touting demonstrates a lack of understanding of American psychology. The country was founded on revolution against a despot, that's the core American value. You can't deal with a population like that by sending in storm troopers, that will obviously just escalate the situation.

I think you're misunderstanding the audience. The Trump administration is not trying to convince or even deter these protesters, all of this is theater for middle America at home watching this on TV. It's a battle for their votes based on who wins the propaganda war by looking less reasonable on the news.
by idle_zealot | 2025-06-13 22:41:25+00:00
> It's explicitly free of any "DEI" or similar discriminatory policies. Anybody who's treating others nicely is welcomed.

> It doesn't matter which country you're coming from, your political views, your race, your sex, your age, your food menu, whether you wear boots or heels, whether you're furry or fairy, Conan or McKay, comic character, a small furry creature from Alpha Centauri, or just an boring average person.

> Together we'll make X great again!

Yup, no political statement here folks. Just throwing out that he thinks DEI means discrimination, he doesn't mind any political disposition, and a fun reference to a popular political movement's slogan.

Pay no attention to the conspicuous lack of mentioning gender identity in a list of characteristics he doesn't mind (which includes being a space alien).

So correct me if I'm wrong, but this is an attempt to create an X fork that doesn't disavow community members for being hateful off-site so long as they're superficially polite while engaging with the repo.

Unless that impoliteness takes the form of calling anyone who values DEI a "commie" in an issue thread, that's fine and encouraged.
by vkazanov | 2025-06-13 22:41:32+00:00
Fsf is a non-profit organisation that proved numerous times that the point of its existence is making sure that I and we and you have freedom to change things we own.

I contribute and transfer copyright to them for my contributions for this sole reason.

Apple is not about freedoms at all.

That's OK. I mean, these are the meanings of what both orgs do. Understanding the system, I'd rather spend my free time on fsf cause (and make money in a commercial organisation).