MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by microtherion | 2025-06-22 00:14:45+00:00
I can only speak to the Mac situation, but most people there would not have "root" in the traditional sense:

* Pedantically speaking, you can not even log in as root, any root level access would have to go through sudo (which is indeed enabled for most users).

* But additionally, even as root, Macs by default have System Integrity Protection enabled, which makes most system files non-modifiable. Users still have full control in that they CAN disable System Integrity Protection, but that involves a reboot and some (documented) command line commands, so most users don't bother doing that.
by ChrisMarshallNY | 2025-06-22 00:15:09+00:00
> That helped them pinpoint a molecule called retinoic acid—a derivative of vitamin A found in many skincare products—as a key ingredient for limb regeneration

Hoo boy, I am seeing some serious fuel for snake oil, here.

I wonder how long before I start getting spam selling retinoic acid as an aid in growing ... er, a ... limb ...

Also, I wonder if the article was edited by AI. That may not be a bad thing, but it would be interesting if The Smithsonian is using AI editors.
by JumpCrisscross | 2025-06-22 00:15:15+00:00
Have you paid for a lobbyist or effected legislation?

You can raise and lower magnitudes. But you can’t change the sign of a position. Not unless it’s an issue the elected has literally never heard of before. (Or cannot remember. Lots of geriatrics.)

Also, $50mm nationally is simply not a lot. There are individual leftist donors with strong pro-Palestinian views injecting that much into the media stream.
by gngoo | 2025-06-22 00:15:43+00:00
Is this a community college perhaps? I think we have another problem with this industry moving way too fast for even very well funded colleges to keep up. Let alone a community college. Of course it’s sad, but at the root it feels like we are now preparing CS students for an outdated job market. I don’t know the answer to this. Of course the fundamentals don’t change, but the market is rapidly changing. Who is even hiring juniors except those with impressive projects, from prestigious colleges or with at least 2-3 years of experience?

If 2025, would have been my own graduation year, I would have had a bad taste in my mouth believing that LLMs can do everything I spend 4 years in college for. Not knowing that writing code is only a small part of the job (as I lack the experience).
by Jemaclus | 2025-06-22 00:16:39+00:00
> This isn't academic nit-picking. It's how medical research works when lives are on the line. Your startup's growth deserves the same rigor.

But does it, really? A lot of companies sell... well, let's say "not important" stuff. Most companies don't cost peoples' lives when you get it wrong. If you A/B test user signups for a startup that sells widgets, people aren't living or dying based on the results. The consequences of getting it wrong are... you sell fewer widgets?

While I understand the overall point of the post -- and agree with it! -- I do take issue with this particular point. A lot of companies are, arguably, _too rigorous_ when it comes to testing.

At my last company, we spent 6 weeks waiting for stat sig. But within 48 hours, we had a positive signal. Conversion was up! Not statistically significant, but trending in the direction we wanted. But to "maintain rigor," we waited 6 weeks before turning it... and the final numbers were virtually the same as the 48 hour numbers.

Note: I'm not advocating stopping tests as soon as something shows trending in the right direction. The third scenario on the post points this out as a flaw! I do like their proposal for "peeking" and subsequent testing.

But, really, let's just be realistic about what level of "rigor" is required to make decisions. We aren't shooting rockets into space. We're shipping software. We can change things if we get them wrong. It's okay. The world won't end.

IMO, the right framing here is: your startup deserves to be as rigorous as is necessary to achieve its goals. If its goals are "stat sig on every test," then sure, treat it like someone might die if you're wrong. (I would argue that you have the wrong goals, in this case, but I digress...)

But if your goals are "do no harm, see if we're heading in the right vector, and trust that you can pivot if it turns out you got a false positive," then you kind of explicitly don't need to treat it with the same rigor as a medical test.
by stego-tech | 2025-06-22 00:17:12+00:00
This is a good story that taps into a lot of the systemic failings in America that hinder progress. Failure of the state to prioritize energy sufficiency over hypothetical mineral rights. Failure of utility companies to maintain their infrastructure to modern standards. Failure of governments to produce consistent and predictable business environments. Failure of bureaucracy to prepare creators and visionaries for success.

All of this results in good intentions being squandered because too many entrenched entities would lose too much hypothetical value on a balance sheet to just do something better for everyone.
by bitwize | 2025-06-22 00:17:38+00:00
In common law jurisdictions, there's a term of art in law -- "unconscionable". It's when a contract is so egregiously one-sided that no reasonable person would agree to it, and it could be ruled unenforceable.

It's not reasonable to expect an employee to build up a body of expertise in a field, and then agree to be bound never to work in that field again after leaving your current job. IANAL, but confidentiality agreements that act like lifetime noncompetes are good candidates for being found unconscionable, even absent an explicit anti-noncompete statute in your jurisdiction. (Other clauses you may rightly consider unfair, I don't know about.)

Making things worse for the companies implementing such contracts is the fact that things change so fast now that they are unable to substantially benefit from such a contract. The contract is purely a CYA move.

If you have agreed to lifetime noncompete terms, you may wish to speak to an employment attorney about how enforceable the contract actually is in your area.
by timewizard | 2025-06-22 00:19:01+00:00
> "Ushering in a new era."

It's ushering in a new era of valley bullshit. If only journalists tried to falsify their premise before blindly publishing it.

> Jack Clark whether AI’s coding ability meant “the age of the nerds” was over.

When was the "age of the nerds" exactly? What does that even mean? My interpretation is that it means "is the age of having to pay skilled programmers for quality work over?" Which explains Bloomberg's interest.

> “I think it’s actually going to be the era of the manager nerds now,” Clark replied. “I think being able to manage fleets of AI agents and orchestrate them is going to make people incredibly powerful.”

And they're all going to be people on a subscription model and locked into one particular LLM. It's not going to make anyone powerful other than the owner class. This is the worst type of lie. They don't believe any of this. They just really really hate having to pay your salary increases every year.

> AI is sometimes described as providing the capability of “infinite interns.”

More like infinite autistic toddlers. Sure. It can somehow play a perfect copy of Chopin after hearing it once. Is that really where business value comes from? Quickly ripping other people off so you can profit first?

The Bloomberg class I'm sure is so thrilled they don't even have the sense to question any of this self serving propaganda.
by comrade1234 | 2025-06-22 00:19:07+00:00
I live in Switzerland and I know an ancient forest where I go every year and pull out about 20kg of chanterelle and 10kg of toten trumpeten. These mushrooms come back every year, potentially for thousands of years.

One year I found a big piece of a clay cooking pan in the area where the chanterelles grow.

There are also tons of ravines, potential caves but I won't know until I climb down the ravines, but about 20 km away there are tourist caves where you can pay to enter them, part of the same ridge system.

I wanted to see if I could use a metal detector to find treasure, like in the article but it's illegal here. I suppose I could go in at night with the equipment but it's probably not worth it since while the Roman's were very active in Switzerland they weren't in this very specific region.

But still, where did the clay cooking pan come from?
by const_cast | 2025-06-22 00:19:41+00:00
In my mind it's very similar to how people sometimes frame the cost-effectiveness of Apple products.

Like when the 5K iMac originally came out, there was a lot of people claiming it was a good value. Because if you bought a 5K display and then built a PC, that would end up being more expensive. So, like for like, Apple was cheaper.

But... that assumed you even needed a 5K display, which were horribly overpriced and rare at the time. As soon as you say "4K is good enough", the cost advantage disappears, and it's not even close.
by bravesoul2 | 2025-06-22 00:19:56+00:00
I agree. I didn't mean to imply you need to have millions. More that the effect of money for an individual is non linear. It may affect how you invest though. Is X stock good? Well X is good but what about your risk profile?

For most people that is why a pension makes sense. You can accumulate a lot over 40 years there but paying into it will make zero difference to your happiness, but it might make a big difference once you hit an age where you can't earn as much.

Living frugal also helps there. Like calories in calories out there are two ends of the stick.

I like your comment!
by lightedman | 2025-06-22 00:20:18+00:00
"No LED used for lighting in households is operated this way. You run them hot, because they can take it and you aren't wasting costly LED die area."

I literally work in this field, manufacturing thousands of LED boards of all types every single day.

Yes, they absolutely do. Especially under-cabinet lighting - it's deliberately underdriven via voltage because the thin strips of aluminum are basically a backing support strip and nothing more.

Let's grab what under my cabinets, for example. 4 LEDs in series. Okay, assuming 3V that's a 12V chain - the included wall-wart power supply is a 10.5V output supply at 200mA.

Please stop.
by overfeed | 2025-06-22 00:20:42+00:00
> You also don't see players obviously dazed or knocked out after heading the ball.

That depends a lot on the relative speed, and some kids can kick the ball pretty damn hard. I had an incident where I headed the ball, and had no other memory formed for the rest of that day. I don't recall the rest of the match, the final score, or how I got home.
by II2II | 2025-06-22 00:21:19+00:00
I would argue there is a glaring problem with the memo: it is basically written from the perspective of someone who writes memos. Computers were fantastic replacements for many uses of typewriters back then, allowing people to do much more with greater ease. Yet they were not universal replacements for typewriters.

The article pointed out one glaring problem, one that was present with the Apple II (along with other microcomputers of the era): it could only display uppercase text. It got around that by displaying capital letters in inverse. A related problem was the limited display width. While a typed page is roughly 80 characters wide, the Apple II could only display 40 characters per line. Thankfully the Apple II was expandable. 80 column cards and cards that displayed lowercase text were created, but Apple didn't introduce such capabilities themselves until the Apple IIe. Even then you needed to buy their 80 column card (but at least that standardized things).

Another hitch was actually typing lowercase letters. You needed to do a shift-key modification for applications to register the shift-key being pressed when a letter was typed. Again, Apple didn't standardize this until the Apple IIe.

Of course, those weren't the only issues. Computerization may have been taking over the world, but so were reams of paper. While most of those additional reams of paper were being generated by computers, much of that paperwork existed before. Forms, in particular, almost necessitated the use of a typewriter. While I would hate to line up forms in a typewriter, such feats were nearly impossible with printers.

So I guess you're right in some circumstances: computers were not a good experience. That doesn't negate the times when they offered a far better experience. Whether you're writing memos or novels, the ability to go back and edit text outweighs the drawbacks (never mind all of the advancements that were just around the corner). But a blanket ban on typewriters was myopic.
by Greem | 2025-06-22 00:21:33+00:00
I have started to create a new open source project called EXSQL, which is a direct improvement to SQL, adding more modern enhancements and better syntax for complex applications.

# What is EXSQL about?

Enhanced and eXtended Structured Query Language is actually a transpiler (like JSX), which seeks to improve SQL by simplifying tasks and improving the syntax, such as inheritance in databases, making it a rather complicated and exhausting task, instead, thanks to EXSQL we could do something like “SUBTYPE OF” in a CREATE TABLE and it would generate all the necessary logic for the database but we would be using EXSQL to do everything.

# What I have done with the project so far

Right now I just did something simple (and not working) with python and Lark and created the repository where the project will be saved. I'm currently looking for feedback and help to carry out the project.

Github Repository: https://github.com/Greem3/EXSQL
by aaron695 | 2025-06-22 00:22:34+00:00
The bunker busters will not have worked on Fordow.

(It will be the first time a GBU-57A/B has been used in war, which is interesting)

They needed troops on the ground. Israel was going to do this.

It's possible they have just collapsed the entrances.

Trumps comments - https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump You have a loop, @Osint613 reposted Trump as "Fordow is gone" which Trump reposted. Neither of them have any idea.

(Natanz, Isfahan were already hit and damaged by Israel, the US didn't bother to bunker bust them, it was Tomahawks from subs )

3D model of Fordow - https://x.com/TheIntelLab/status/1398716540485308417

You need a tactical nuke to destroy Fordow, but the USA considers tactical the same as strategic, so it would be very unlikely. Russia could, since they put tactical in a different category.
by tptacek | 2025-06-22 00:23:50+00:00
I think Netanyahu belongs in prison, and Trump, the less said the better, but: couldn't have happened to a nicer unauthorized weapons-grade uranium enrichment facility dug into the side of a mountain hours outside of population centers.

If you haven't already, I highly recommend reading up on the GBU-57 "bunker buster" bomb, because it is some Merrie Melodies Acme brand munitions. It's deliberately as heavy as they can make a bomb, not with explosives but just with mass. They should have shaped it like a giant piano.
by georgelyon | 2025-06-22 00:26:04+00:00
While this is a common view, recently I’ve begun to wonder if it may be secretly an antipattern. I’ve run into a number of cases over the years where additional fields don’t break parsing, or even necessarily the main functionality of a program, but result in subtle incorrect behavior in edge cases. Things like values that are actually distinct being treated as equal because the fields that differ are ignored. More recently, I’ve seen LLMs get confused because they hallucinated tool input fields that were ignored during the invocation of a tool.

I’m a little curious to try and build an API where parsing must be exact, and changes always result in a new version of the API. I don’t actually think it would be too difficult, but perhaps some extra tooling around downgrading responses and deprecating old versions may need to be built.
by fellowniusmonk | 2025-06-22 00:26:10+00:00
Can the cosmos make a mistake? Can a highly energetic RNG generator make mistakes? Random perhapse, mistake is just a very anthropocentic way of phrasing it

State change is all you need to create humans and state change is impossible to deny. Maybe other basic stuff exists too but that isn't important.

We are structural semantic meaning generators, we turn energy into semantic meaning.

Nothing and meaninglessness don't actually exist.

You can assert otherwise but that assertion relies on the very structures that make you able to assert, so assert that everything is meaningless but your ability to do so undercuts your own assertion. Even if you remain silent your brain keeps making meaning.

Does meaning lead anywhere? It might, idk, seems too early to call it.

Based on our current understanding and empirical observation, there are a very small number of entities and their progeny that can try and figure it out until the heat death of the universe.

If you feel meaningless it's just evolutionary pressure to not get stuck in a local maximum.
by alephnerd | 2025-06-22 00:26:49+00:00
We don't need a second North Korea. Nor do we want to normalize every country starting a nuclear program.

Air strikes do not constitute boots on the ground, and the rules based norms around "you break it, you own it" ended with the last flight from Kabul. Most likely, we will conduct bombing raids, but take no part in nation building.

Ironically, South Korea wanted to do this to North Korea in 2003 (edit: 1993-94), but the Bush (edit: Clinton) administration pushed back because they were concentrating on Iraq and Afghanistan (edit: Yugoslavia).

Edit 1:

Nuclear weapons ALONE do not act as a deterrent anymore. Most nuclear countries have second/third strike capabilities and nuclear triad capabilities.

This is something that Iran has been working on for decades with a fairly robust ballistics and cruise missile program, and attempts at building a domestic nuclear submarine program.

More critically, just about every regional power in the Middle East has been investing in similar capabilities in case an Iran breakout happens. Going from 1 additonal country with nuclear weapons to 3-4 leads to a cascading domino effect (a nuclear Iran means a nuclear Saudi means a nuclear Turkiye means a nuclear Egypt...)

Edit 2:

For the downvoters - a country who's leadership explicitly chants "مرگ بر آمریکا" (Death to America) will unsurprisingly be viewed as a threat. Even our large rivals China or Russia do not normalize that kind of rhetoric.
by Brian_K_White | 2025-06-22 00:27:58+00:00
Wasn't intended to be a distinction but an aside.

But as to that, it's slightly different than merely being able to play back a recording of commands. It IS that, but that can be applied in a way that acts more like the examples I said like sed or patch, or expect, where the script can apply some funcion to different inputs, not just playing back a recording. I'm not denying the implimentation, how the job gets done, is technically still just a recording of commands.
by sodality2 | 2025-06-22 00:28:19+00:00
Let’s hope whatever intel that says Iran really does have nukes is true, given its propensity as a scapegoat for previous wars. Don’t forget that less than 2 months ago, senior intelligence officials said conclusively Iran was not close to having nuclear weapons.

Edit: 3 months, and source: https://www.newsweek.com/tulsi-gabbard-iran-nuclear-weapon-2...
by nick238 | 2025-06-22 00:29:04+00:00
So with mineral rights in Texas, could you just buy/lease them out from under one of your rivals/enemies and just bulldoze their buildings for the lulz? "Sorry, I just really needed that teaspoon of dirt from under your multimillion dollar factory". I guess that's the whole idea of the insurance/waivers, so do you need 50% of the owners of the rights to agree?

Also, I heard that Texas was the best place to build things (cf. Abundance by Thompson & Klein)
by const_cast | 2025-06-22 00:30:22+00:00
Free market and money vote and yadda yadda yadda requires consumers to be aware of and mobilize on boycotts. If we want competition, anti-consumer practices to disappear, price transparency, privacy, and on and on, then we need to be willing to mobilize on a boycott on the grounds of ethics or morality.

We all have this theory of the invisible hand and market dynamics but as soon as people actually, you know, practice that then we get a sour taste in our mouth. The truth is cancel culture, or whatever you want to call it, is fundamental to capitalist economies in a classical sense.
by heavyset_go | 2025-06-22 00:32:20+00:00
> Such as obfs4, I presume.

Yep, but the author of obfs4 says not to use it, there are more modern transports with less flaws.

At the end of the day, the transport lists are public, but sharded, so it's truly just obfuscation no matter what transport protocol you use. Someone observing your connection with the resources to map out transport relays can tell if you're using Tor.

> Have you heard about it, or have you used it before?

I haven't, but it looks interesting. It seems they're doing a similar mixnet approach to SimpleX.

> I agree. How much more secure is that?

If you don't to rely on a third party to queue and relay your messages when your recipient comes online, it's one less party that you're sharing information with.

I also believe it opens you up to Tor correlation attacks, like what happened with Ricochet. Maybe an overlay mixnet can add some further obfuscation, as with SimpleX and RACE, but I assume those overlays are vulnerable to correlation attacks, as well.
by avoutos | 2025-06-22 00:34:00+00:00
The data doesn't seem to support this claim. Israel has not "bought" any Presidents. Even assuming all pro-israel spending comes from the government of Israel and not from say U.S. groups that support Israel, it is a fraction of the combined and individual spending of other interest groups.

The pro-Israel lobby has spent roughly 10-15M per year since 1990 except for the past 2-3 years when it has ramped up due to the war. This is hardly enough to offset the billions of dollars spent in U.S. politics.

For this to be true it would also require Israel to "buy" presidents who acted against Israel's interests (e.g. Obama and Biden who financially bolsered Iran). This seems unlikely.

The U.S. does not unconditionally fund and defend Israel. Most (75-90%) of U.S. Federal military aid to Israel is contingent on Israel buying from American companies. This effectively makes most funding a roundabout subsidy of American defense contractors. There are also human rights conditions and many others.

Israel and the U.S. actually have common interests in the Middle East. Contrary to some opinions, allowing Israel to cease to exist is not in the interest of the U.S. although I do support having Israel be less reliant on the U.S.

sources: https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus?cycle=All&ind=Q...

https://www.congress.gov/crs_external_products/RL/PDF/RL3322...
by const_cast | 2025-06-22 00:35:15+00:00
> It's surprising to me that attractive, GPU-accelerated window compositing is not a 100% solved problem in the Linux ecosystem.

It is - kwin has been doing this for a long time, both on X and now on Wayland.

The problem is that the Linux desktop is composed of mostly open-source software. So people are going to make their own things, fork whatever you make, whatever. There's no one true "blessed" method like we see on Windows or Mac because that's literally impossible on Linux. There's no one corporation or entity strangle-holding the desktop to how they want it done.