MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by JumpCrisscross | 2025-06-17 22:49:41+00:00
> Iranian Regime has strong backing from Brics and others

The BRICS meme from a security standpoint is hollower than the financial one.

Russia and China have no interest (the former, ability) in getting enmeshed in another Anglo-Iranian war. Most of the oil travelling through the Strait of Hormuz goes to Chinese refineries; they really don’t want this to escalate. Both would probably make the occupation phase painful for Americans. Like we did for the Soviets. And the Iranians did for us. But that’s again post-regime change, the part we’ve never figured out how to do since the Marshall Plan, and not in the toppling of the regime bit, which we’re ridiculously good at.

The evidence for the above is the current lack of military or intelligence support anyone is providing Iran.
by ImPostingOnHN | 2025-06-17 22:50:20+00:00
> How is this relevant?

How is it relevant to what? We were discussing "net positives" as in net positives for society, but it sounds like you're referring to net positives for Facebook alone, at the expense of all others.

> The user isn’t the one making the decision to implement it or not

This is true. Here is another difference between them: Facebook isn't the one being harmed by cutting off approved API access to 3rd parties.

It seems like we both agree that Facebook and users are different groups, in different circumstances, with different things to gain and lose from different decisions made here.

With that shared foundation of understanding: Why should we care about what Facebook wants, more than we care what users want? Why should we care about Facebook wanting to stifle startups and other competitors, more than we care what users want? Why should we care about Facebook's profit margin, more than we care what users want?

Of course Facebook is free to do what is good for them and bad for users, and they indeed chose (and continue to choose) to do so. Here we see the predictable result: Users criticizing them for it.

We are all smart and can comprehend Facebook's purely-economic "fuck the users, we wanna make money" decision criteria just fine, but we don't have to respect it.
by watusername | 2025-06-17 22:50:43+00:00
Well, read the next paragraph. It's clearly an acknowledgment of privilege and an appeal:

“I know I will get due process and that my rights will be protected,” Lander said to a throng of supporters who gathered spontaneously in Foley Square that evening after his release. “But Edgardo will sleep in an ICE detention facility God knows where tonight…he has been stripped of his due process rights in a country that is supposed to be founded on equal justice under law,” Lander continued, naming the immigrant detained by federal agents at the same time the comptroller was taken into custody.
by PaulHoule | 2025-06-17 22:51:36+00:00
As a kid in the 1980s I thought something was a bit off about K&R, kind of a discontinuity. Notably C succeeded where PL/I failed but by 1990 or so you started to see actual specs written by adults such as Common Lisp and Java where you really can start at the beginning and work to the end and not have to skip forward or read the spec twice. That discontinuity is structural though to C and also C++ and you find it in most books about C++ and in little weird anomalies like the way typedefs force the parser to have access to the symbol table.

Sure C was a huge advance in portability but C and C++ represent a transitional form between an age where you could cleanly spec a special purpose language like COBOL or FORTRAN but not quite spec a general systems programming language and one in which you could. C++, thus, piles a huge amount of complexity on top of a foundation which is almost but not quite right.
by jeffbee | 2025-06-17 22:51:57+00:00
You should of course verify these results in your scenario. However, I somewhat doubt that the person exists who cares greatly about performance, and is still willing to consider bzip2. There isn't a point anywhere in the design space where bzip2 beats zstd. You can get smaller outputs from zstd in 1/20th the time for many common inputs, or you can spend the same amount of time and get a significantly smaller output, and zstd decompression is again 20-50x faster depending. So the speed of your bzip2 implementation hardly seems worth arguing over.
by dgb23 | 2025-06-17 22:52:26+00:00
"Const" is half baked as it implies that you declare an immutable value, but it only prevents redeclaration and direct reassignment.

"Import" breaks the browser REPL and the dynamic nature of JS. You can't redeclare, look or move into a module. Now JS is already broken in that you can't redeclare variables declared with let/const. But not being able to move into modules an extra crime.
by DidYaWipe | 2025-06-17 22:52:30+00:00
I think it's people who lack

1. Experience

2. Aptitude

3. Supervision

And then there are the apologists who attack anyone who calls for better, and almost the entire rest of the population... who

1. Don't take time to convey feedback

2. Can't find a way to convey feedback

3. Can't distill exactly why the product sucks and formulate feedback.

I just wasted a good portion of my afternoon trying to activate change-tracking in Word. The Word UI is an even bigger POS than the rest of Windows. I mean... it's a wonderland of baffling rabbit-holes, to the point where I'm laughing while typing this out because it seems like a prank. MS even eschewed their own File dialog in this thing, to replace it with a page that looks like hand-coded HTML without a stylesheet. Truly incredible.

So I took screen shots. I wrote up a detailed explanation as to why this is defective. And then I used MS's "Feedback Hub" (which vanishingly few people are going to find or bother with) to try to file a report. After typing it all out and attaching files...

"Something went wrong. Please try again later."

And of course it deleted all my work. And it has happened on four attempts throughout the day.

So when companies claim, gee, no one has complained before... it's just another mockery of the recipient.
by spwa4 | 2025-06-17 22:53:21+00:00
Why wouldn't the human mind have the same problem? Hell, it's ironic because one thing ML is pretty damn good at is to get humans to violate their prompting, and, frankly, basic rational thought:

https://www.ic3.gov/PSA/2024/PSA241203

Or, more concretely:

https://edition.cnn.com/2024/02/04/asia/deepfake-cfo-scam-ho...
by dplarson | 2025-06-17 22:53:41+00:00
Microsoft has a blog with more details [0] but the Axios article does a good job of summarizing the main points. The full report is also available to read [1].

[0] https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/worklab/work-trend-index/bre...

[1] https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/worklab/work-trend-index/202...
by JumpCrisscross | 2025-06-17 22:53:42+00:00
Do you see an out for Khamenei et al? They can’t credibly dismantle their nuclear deterrent and expect to keep their heads. Israel and America cannot accept it, particularly now that its conventional defences have been shown ineffective.

The classic approach, airlifting the Ayatollah to a dacha in Moscow while the IRGC saves face and plots a forever path to new elections, falls apart when you consider how Iran’s internal security and geopolitical alignment would need to be sculpted in a way that would satisfy the great powers. (Iranian crude fuels China’s refineries.)
by bredren | 2025-06-17 22:53:42+00:00
It’s helpful but I think Anthropic should be offering non technical versions of this.

For example, a marketing group is interested in agents but needs a guide on how to spec them at a basic level.

There is a figure toward the end and an appendix that starts to drive at this.

Even though it’s new, “how to build them” is an implementation concern.
by TimTheTinker | 2025-06-17 22:53:49+00:00
> there is a lot of overlap between DSL's and frameworks

Not just frameworks, but libraries also. Interacting with some of the most expressive libraries is often akin to working with a DSL.

In fact, the paradigms of some libraries required such expressiveness that they spawned their own in-language DSLs, like JSX for React, or LINQ expressions in C#. These are arguably the most successful DSLs out there.
by cye131 | 2025-06-17 22:53:55+00:00
I'm not a fan of this blog post as it tries to pass off a method that's not accepted as a good or standard time series methodology (graph transformers) as though it were a norm. Transformers perform poorly on time series, and graph deep learning performs poorly for tasks that don't have real behaviorial/physical edges (physical space/molecules/social graphs etc), so it's unclear why combining them would produce anything useful for "business applications" of time series like sales forecasting.

For those interested in transformers with time series, I recommend reading this paper: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2205.13504. There is also plenty of other research showing that transformers-based time series models generally underperform much simpler alternatives like boosted trees.

After looking further it seems like this startup is both trying to publish academic research promoting these models as well as selling it to businesses, which seems like a conflict of interest to me.
by jiggawatts | 2025-06-17 22:54:32+00:00
> So I brought the test server down during the call by making 10 requests at once.

Back in the very early 2000s I got sent to "tune IIS performance" at a 100-developer ISV working on a huge government project.

They showed me that pressing the form submit button on just two PCs at once had "bad performance".

No, not it didn't. One was fast[1], the other took 60 seconds almost exactly. "That's a timeout on a lock or something similar", I told them.

They then showed me their 16-socket database server that must have cost them millions and with a straight face asked me if I thought that they needed to upgrade it to get more capacity. Upgrade to what!? That was the biggest machine I have ever seen! I've never in the quarter century since then seen anything that size with my own two eyes. I don't believe bigger Wintel boxes have ever been made.

I then asked their database developers how they're doing transactions and whether they're using stored procedures or not.

One "senior" database developer asked me what a stored procedure is.

The other "senior" database developer asked me what a transaction is.

"Oh boy..."

[1] Well no, not really, it took about a second, which was long enough for a human button press to to "overlap" the two transactions in time. That was a whole other horror story of ODBC connection pooling left off and one-second sleeps in loops to "fix" concurrency issues.
by TacticalCoder | 2025-06-17 22:55:24+00:00
I think that that's the excuse the current regime in Iran is using to try to prevent iranians from coordinating a coup.

By "chance" the rightful crown prince (Pahlavi dynasty), an exile, is now making a comeback on social media, saying that the current iranian regime shall fail.

There are talks online as to how the current regime is falling: and there are a lot of people who would be very happy to see those bearded men ruling by sharia law gone.

The last thing the religious cracknuts at the helm of that islamic state want are iranians themselves using the opportunity to topple up the regime.

When they say: "Delete WhatsApp to not help Israel locate you" what they really mean is "Do not share the vids of the crown prince announcing he'll give you a life without sharia punishment".
by homefree | 2025-06-17 22:57:33+00:00
There was a recent interview (iirc maybe with Ben Thompson or at least he mentioned it) where Zuck said they were seeing their growth continue to accelerate in the US and it sounded like they’d be on track to overtake iMessage in a couple years if the rate continued.

Growth like that happens slowly and then quickly. I’m using WhatsApp more now and I didn’t use it before, so empirically I’ve seen the expansion personally.
by v5v3 | 2025-06-17 22:57:47+00:00
Not true.

Chinese planes with transponders being turned off are landing in Iran with unknown Cargo on board. (Reported across the news). Iran is supplying Russia with Drones for Ukraine so strategic partner.

Russia recently lost Syria as an ally with the change in government, they will not want to lose Iran to the USA too.

If the West can back Ukraine to the level they have done, then no different for Iran's friends to do the same.
by jchw | 2025-06-17 22:57:50+00:00
Some of them are not really "open" issues, which is blatantly obvious if you try to drag a tab in Chrome in KDE or GNOME: The dockable widget use case is covered by xdg-toplevel-drag[1], has been implemented by multiple libraries including Qt 6, and you can fallback to normal drag'n'drop with the downside that the user can't drag the window with the handle. A new protocol was just added for pointer warping[2], too. Not going to lie and say the surface occlusion hanging GL thing isn't annoying, but it is indeed solved by using fifo-v1[3] and commit-timing-v1[4] or the equivalent stop-gap protocols that existed before those ones were merged, since not everything is there yet. Some of these problems even had some workarounds prior to the proper protocols being merged; SDL3 already had a way to warp the pointer by (ab)using the existing pointer constraints API.

KiCad for some reason chose to paint the picture that all of these are status quo issues that are not getting solved... but the rate of progress has been pretty good actually.

Some of the issues they list are also very blatantly KiCad/wxWidgets issues and not really anything inherently to do with Wayland. Seriously, "Graphical glitches" and "Application freezes and crashes" are not problems caused by your Wayland compositor.

[1]: https://wayland.app/protocols/xdg-toplevel-drag-v1

[2]: https://wayland.app/protocols/pointer-warp-v1

[3]: https://wayland.app/protocols/fifo-v1

[4]: https://wayland.app/protocols/commit-timing-v1
by salt-thrower | 2025-06-17 22:58:05+00:00
At my current workplace, we do have a roadmap for the business, but the actual backlog of tickets to implement work is all waiting on other siloed teams to make decisions that we are downstream of. This ranges from our infrastructure model to simple things like “which CSS components are we allowed to use.”

We are also explicitly NOT allowed to make any code changes that aren’t part of a story that our product owner has approved and prioritized.

The result is that we scrape together some stories to work on every sprint, but if we finish it early, we quickly run into red tape and circular conversations with other “decision makers” who need to tell us what we’re allowed to do before we actually do anything.

It’s fairly maddening. The whole org is hamstrung by a few workaholic individuals who control decision making for several teams and are chronically unavailable as a result.

I’ve seen this sort of thing happen at other big enterprises too but my current situation is perhaps an extreme example of dysfunction. Point being, when an org gets tangled up like this, LLMs aren’t gonna save it :)
by duxup | 2025-06-17 22:58:15+00:00
Maintenance never seems to be respected, but without it none of us could do what we do. It applies to garbage men, and even tech.

I worked tech support for nearly 20 years on various things, big networking equipment, mainframe equipment. Some companies paid really well and made their money / stayed afloat through hard times because they had a reputation for providing high quality tech support. But in the end every company seems to devalue it eventually. Quality of management starts to dip, resources are slowly siphoned away, some management mistakes that because problems get reported through support channels that is somehow always support's fault. Things start to turn and it goes bad, someone decides it looks good on a resume to outsource and so on.

Before I left my last support job the local manager decided to cancel the quarterly pizza party (maybe couple hundred bucks in pizza) to save money ... I was taking a buy out (I was fortunate) and as a fun way to go out I held my own pizza party, spent my own money ;) Company pulling in hundreds of millions of dollars and I held the pizza party.

I moved on and now I write code where you get paid more / valued more / more respect making new things. It's hard to avoid the fact that maintenance is just not respected.
by recursivedoubts | 2025-06-17 22:58:52+00:00
while it's #1 I might as well say, there's a book:

https://www.lulu.com/shop/carson-gross/the-grug-brained-deve...

it's the same content + an index, so not worth buying unless you want the hard copy, but maybe a good convo-starter for the ol'dev team
by vincenthwt | 2025-06-17 22:59:46+00:00
Your clever remark highlights poor emotional intelligence and weak communication skills. Sarcasm might have its place in casual conversation, but in professional discussions, it signals insecurity and a lack of respect—neither of which contribute to meaningful dialogue.

Your disdain for LLMs is equally puzzling. Are you seriously suggesting I shouldn’t use tools to improve my grammar and delivery simply because they don’t align with your engineering view? Ironically, LLM-based tools likely support your own work—whether through coding assistance, debugging, or other tasks—even if you choose not to acknowledge it.

By the way, I used an LLM to craft this reply too—who doesn’t?
by jchw | 2025-06-17 23:00:40+00:00
The obvious right choice if you're on an LTS OS where Wayland isn't in a good enough shape is to continue using X11 sessions. Very few things are dropping support for X11 right now, and on an LTS OS you presumably would be insulated from that. Obviously you can't benefit from anything Wayland improves on, but I suspect that's not a huge problem.

I'd guess an LTS release x years from now would be a different story. Even next year possibly, based on the pace things are going lately.
by GMoromisato | 2025-06-17 23:01:08+00:00
One of the many ironies of modern software development is that we sometimes introduce complexity because we think it will "save time in the end". Sometimes we're right and it does save time--but not always and maybe not often.

Three examples:

DRY (Don't Repeat Yourself) sometimes leads to premature abstraction. We think, "hey, I bet this pattern will get used elsewhere, so we need to abstract out the common parts of the pattern and then..." And that's when the Complexity Demon enters.

We want as many bugs as possible caught at compile-time. But that means the compiler needs to know more and more about what we're actually trying to do, so we come up with increasingly complex types which tax your ability to understand.

To avoid boilerplate we create complex macros or entire DSLs to reduce typing. Unfortunately, the Law of Leaky Abstractions means that when we actually need to know the underlying implementation, our head explodes.

Our challenge is that each of these examples is sometimes a good idea. But not always. Being able to decide when to introduce complexity to simplify things is, IMHO, the mark of a good software engineer.
by magarnicle | 2025-06-17 23:01:10+00:00
I know, I get it, but I've realised that I'm not actually grug-brained. The way my brain works, I remember things pretty well; I like to get into the details of systems. So if more complexity in the code means the app can do more or a task is automated away I'll make the change and know I'll be able to remember how it works in the future.

This doesn't mean OP is bad advice, just make a conscious decision about what to do with complexity and understand the implications.
by angry_octet | 2025-06-17 23:01:14+00:00
Omg this is something I have experienced too many times, and constantly warring with the other side of the coin: people who never want to make any change unless it is blessed by a consultant from Microsoft/VMWare/SAP and then it becomes the only possible course of action, and they get the CIO to sign off on some idiocy that will never work and say "CIO has decreed Project Falcon MUST SUCCEED" when CIO can't even tie his shoelaces. Giant enterprise integration will happen!

In fact we're going through one of these SAP HANA migrations at present and it's very broken, because the prime contractor has delivered a big ball of mud with lots of internal microservices.
by potholereseller | 2025-06-17 23:02:07+00:00
Baudrilliard didn't assert that reality/facts never existed; he in fact asserted that prior to the 20th century, there was plenty of correlation between symbols and facts/reality. His vision of the hyper-real is that it is detached from reality and it's facts; this is why I included "mindspace" parenthetically as an alternative word for "hyper-reality"; those operating in hyper-reality are physically in reality, but their actions appear to be based on another world, which they share through things like news media.

> post-structuralism

I don't think Baudrilliard can be categorized as post-structuralist or post-modernist, because "Baudrillard had also opposed post-structuralism, and had distanced himself from postmodernism."[0]

[0] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Baudrillard>
by jxjnskkzxxhx | 2025-06-17 23:02:17+00:00
> lot of this "rewrite X in Rust" stuff feels like

Indeed. You know the react-angular-vue nevermind is churn? It appears that the trend of people pushing stuff because it benefit their careers is coming to the low level world.

I for one still find it mistifying that Linus torvals let this people into the kernel. Linus, who famous banned c++ from the kernel not because of c++ in itself, but to ban c++ programmer culture.
Show HN: AI that solves group scheduling – InstantGroups
by InstantGroups | 2025-06-17 23:02:31+00:00
Hey HN,

I built InstantGroups to finally solve the scheduling mess that happens any time three or more people try to meet, especially across teams, companies, and time zones.

The idea came out of pain: At my last company leading growth I was constantly coordinating sales calls with multiple stakeholders, panel interviews, and team planning sessions, and despite shared calendars, nothing worked once multiple busy people were involved. Existing tools fell short for wrangling groups, especially with external participants.

So I built something better.

InstantGroups is an AI group meeting scheduler that: - Collects availability (via calendar integrations, natural language, or even text/email - replies) - Confirms a mutual time with everyone involved - Sends invites + reminders automatically - Follows up intelligently if no time is found on the first pass

No logins are required for guests. No stale availability polling. No manual back-and-forth. Just give it the meeting details and participant list, and InstantGroups takes over from there.

We’ve been testing and it's saving hours per week. Would love feedback, ideas, or thoughts!

You can sign up for the free early access release here: https://instantgroups.ai

Happy to answer any questions.
by jrochkind1 | 2025-06-17 23:02:53+00:00
You are under no obligation to continue this conversation of course.

> Unless the entire end to end operation is wrapped inside a giant transaction, no system in the world can give you the confirmation.

But how do people use, say, redis, without an external "checkpoint" system, how do you do, say, an INCR operation, and know if it succeeded or not?

Or are most uses of redis actually dangerous and subject to these error conditions, perhaps it's tolerable to risk that error for most redis use cases, but wasn't for the system under discussion? Most developers using redis definitely aren't using external "checkpointing" systems, or considering if they should be or not -- should they be?

But of course you've convinced me that the system under discussion would have been better off using an rdbms, something I never doubted.