MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by the_af | 2025-06-04 21:10:01+00:00
> Like the city-states that have free flowing capital and populations, but somehow avoid an analogue to international law.

This is what kills me about attempts like this (e.g. like Scott Alexander's) to make Yarvin's ideas seem "interesting" or "thought-provoking".

Well-read as Yarvin might be, only someone who is mentally a teenager can have his kind of beliefs. "Society would be great if it weren't for all these monstruous things I don't like, artificially imposed on us by... aliens?"

It reminds me of teenagers who go online and make arguments like "well, ackshually, the US is not a democracy but a republic...". Yeah, yeah, you're very smart for pointing this out, now go sit in a corner and let the grownups talk.
by ursaguild | 2025-06-04 21:10:13+00:00
Especially with a client, consider the word choices around "learning". When using llms, agents, or rag, the system isn't learning (yet) but making a decision based on the context you provide. Most models are a fixed snapshot. If you provide up to date information, it will be able to give you an output based on that.

"Learning" happens when initially training the llm or arguably when fine-tuning. Neither of which are needed for your use case as presented.
by dannyobrien | 2025-06-04 21:10:23+00:00
I think the compromise position here is to concentrate on the 1980s, and acknowledge that there was a lot of networking tech going on in academia in the 1970s.

However, in context, what I was trying to convey was that the personal computing revolution took place outside of academia. Generally, that lineage started in the early 1970s, with the homebrew movement, and took off with the Apple II in the United States in 1977. This is also well-documented, but a different branch, and definitely more concerned with the idea of computers as providing autonomy.
by burningChrome | 2025-06-04 21:10:30+00:00
My first worry wouldn't be this.

I got out of doing drone work because of all the FAA restrictions on where you can fly drones now. Within 30 miles of a major metro area? Nope. Within 20 miles of an airport? Nope. I'm exaggerating of course, but it got to a point where I was having real problems trying to find areas where you can fly a drone just for fun so I just gave up and quit.

My more immediate fear would be how the gov can control who and where these drones will be able to fly. If some revolutionary built a swarm of drones, it would be pretty easy (I would think) for the gov to just jam the signal and shut them down.

The parts? I'm not worried about. Its the gov holding the keys to access that makes me more worried.
by 0xbadcafebee | 2025-06-04 21:10:33+00:00
Yeah but you can just get a Megasquirt DIY kit and make your own ECU for most EFI engines (from 1 to 16 cylinders). To the other person's comment about the generator circuitry: most generators are pretty simple mechanically, you can make a new circuit to control the output.

I'm guessing the rationale of the law is to prevent needing a repair company to exist & reinvent the electrical components of every single product in existence.
by ceejayoz | 2025-06-04 21:11:11+00:00
You've left out the fairly obvious possibility #3, which is "Yarvin fears reputational damage to Vance that might prevent Vance from helping him advance his ideology". This, after all, was Thiel's concern in the quoted exchange.

#2 gets a lot more plausible when you remember these folks often care more about the backing (especially $$$) of someone like Thiel than the regular public, too.
by mingus88 | 2025-06-04 21:11:43+00:00
The democrats were foolish to run Biden, 100%

Biden ran in 2020 as a single term president. He did his job to prevent a second consecutive Trump term. At some point that changed, probably because Trump never gave up power.

Again, the democrats were foolish to not aggressively prosecute Trump. Merrill did nothing for far too long.

The democrats were foolish to make Harris the “border czar” since the republicans simply have them beat on immigration messaging. They handed her a huge weakness and played directly into the republicans strengths.

The democrats were foolish to not have a primary. Harris simply is not popular. She does not perform well in the primaries, so they just decided no primary and a weak candidate was their only option.
by genewitch | 2025-06-04 21:12:21+00:00
> It seems to me there's usually a political dimension to people who refuse to understand what people mean, because its easier to denigrate people if they cling to definitions that aren't intended by their political opponents use of a word.

and to an extent, the rest of your comment - the solution, according to my PhD friend, is to establish the framing of the argument before you actually have the argument. It's more fun to not establish framing, but it's more effective to establish framing, first. I wonder if i have the publication (thesis?) he made on my NAS.
by bri3d | 2025-06-04 21:13:00+00:00
I saw that too - I'm assuming it means they're indeed using the DNN for stabilization. This has been done several times over the years, but generally with results which only rival PID and don't surpass it, so that's quite interesting. What's odd is that the physical architecture of the drone doesn't really make sense for this, so there must be some tweaks beyond the "spec" model. Hopefully some papers come soon instead of press releases.
by xenadu02 | 2025-06-04 21:13:05+00:00
Fun fact:

All words and grammar rules are made up. Entirely. As in... invented by humans. The laws of physics don't really care.

If lots of people use "octopi" (and they do) and most people understand what it means (which they do) then congrats! It is, in fact, a word. If enough people apply an "i" ending to words then that becomes itself a new grammar rule.

English, just like every other language, also has a ton of unwritten grammar rules as well as spoken word only rules.

In short: octopi is in fact a perfectly cromulent word.
by doctorwho42 | 2025-06-04 21:13:38+00:00
For reference, I have a used car from 1998. Kind of a junker, but has a fun v6 in it (manual). But the point is, my city values it at $1500 and hasn't let that value go any lower for city vehicle tax purposes.

So I'd imagine most cars ever if old junk piles are still worth $1500 to the state.
by bonaldi | 2025-06-04 21:13:44+00:00
> Instead of tapping buttons to bold text or create headers, users could type *bold* or # Header directly into their notes.

Which will be more keystrokes, not fewer – it's faster to get to the formatting buttons than it is the punctuation keyboard on iOS, and even on Mac the shortcut commands are often faster too.

Notes was a fanastic example of a rich-text environment, but if Markdown input helps the die-hards that is great, so long as I don't have to ever see, use or be aware of it.
by modeless | 2025-06-04 21:13:49+00:00
This take makes zero sense. Central touchscreen, minimalist design, and and no dashboard display has been the design since the Model 3 first came out. None of that changed. It didn't stop the Model Y from becoming the best selling vehicle of any kind worldwide. The stalk thing is new but the new Model Y has the turn signal stalk added back (actually it was never removed from the Y), so they are backing down on that.
by xp84 | 2025-06-04 21:14:07+00:00
Doesn't CORS just restrict whether the webpage JS context gets to see the response of the target request? The request itself happens anyway, right?

So the attack vector that I can imagine is that JS on the browser can issue a specially crafted request to a vulnerable printer or whatever that triggers arbitrary code execution on that other device. That code might be sufficient to cause the printer to carry out your evil task, including making an outbound connection to the attacker's server. Of course, the webpage would not be able to discover whether it was successful, but that may not be important.
by dghlsakjg | 2025-06-04 21:15:54+00:00
Are you sure?

One of the theories for why there were tires on top of the russian planes that were bombed is that it confuses automatic targeting systems by breaking up the profile of the airplane used in automatic target recognition systems.

Hell, even hobbyist level DIY drone stuff can be easily programmed to run an autonomous route with or without a radio link connection. This is a huge reason that GPS is just constantly jammed in this part of the world. If you can get a GPS signal on the battlefield, you can tell a drone to go destroy something.
by orochimaaru | 2025-06-04 21:17:11+00:00
A long time back for my MS CS I took a science of programming course. The way to verify has helped me craft prompts when I do data engineering work. Basically:

Given input (…) and preconditions (…) write me spark code that gives me post conditions (…). If you can formally specify the input, preconditions and post conditions you usually get good working code.

1. Science of programming, David Gries 2. Verification of concurrent and sequential systems
by armchairhacker | 2025-06-04 21:17:31+00:00
tl;dr

> …our attempts at making social media “safe” have led us to this weird world where we can’t talk about rape, gun violence, or even suicide prevention without using code words. We have to sugarcoat the reality of what is happening so that it doesn’t get censored as dangerous material…

Example:

> Just this weekend I saw a post complaining that we constantly use the term sexual assault for every kind of crime and don’t use the word rape, when rape is not the same thing. Yet, even in that post, the author spelled it r@pe because you can’t talk about rape on social media! I’m not sure if they recognized the irony of answering their question in the text.
by ramesh31 | 2025-06-04 21:17:44+00:00
Tools are the only thing that matters, and are what you should focus on, not "agents" as a separate concept. Locking yourself into any particular agent framework is silly; they are nothing but LLM calling while-loops connected to JSON/XML parsers. Tools define and shape the entirety of an agent's capability to do useful things, and through MCP can be trivially shared with virtually any agentic process.
by dji4321234 | 2025-06-04 21:17:53+00:00
There's enormous adoption of autonomous drones.

A large number of front-line FPV drones are equipped with automated last-second targeting systems like https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=coUwYOyIoAU , based on Chinese NPU IP / CCTV systems and readily available as full solutions on Aliexpress. The basic idea is that if the drone loses control or video link due to EW countermeasures, it can continue to the last target.

Loitering and long-range fixed wing reconnaissance drones have been fully autonomous since the beginning. One common recent technique taken from traditional "big" militaries is the use of loitering autonomous high altitude base stations with Starlink or LTE on them providing coverage to the battlefield below, since it's much harder to jam things when they are flying high above the ground.
by happytoexplain | 2025-06-04 21:18:38+00:00
Only in the sense that you could blame anybody in part for anything if you travel through enough indirection. E.g. if I call you cunt for no reason because I'm drunk, and you say I should be more polite and maybe you sound a little annoying when you say it, and in response I stab you, you could say that you're partially at fault for what happened.
by scoofy | 2025-06-04 21:19:21+00:00
We are in the midst of a major political party realignment. When that happens, both parties are split and elections basically create a broken legislature. When that happens, people start daydreaming: "what if my political group didn't have do deal with other people having influence on the way government should be."

Even trifecta states are dealing with this, as is obvious from the turmoil and wild animosity that exists in one-party California. The constitution gets changed willy-nilly to create effectively unchangeable advantages for certain groups at the expense of others.

The US is moving from a situation in which they had enough money (well, deficit spending) to solve most of our problems without upsetting too many constituencies. Those days are over and we're now trying to do something, anything, to avoid having to make tough decisions that might mean losing an election. Our electorate wanting something, anything, to prevent them from losing whatever preferential political goals they have are entertaining the same naive ideas.

Win once, and let the next generation deal with the fallout. Basic human selfishness par excellence.
by morninj | 2025-06-04 21:19:25+00:00
Science (https://science.xyz/) | SF Bay Area (Alameda, CA) | Onsite | Software engineers, mechanical engineers, electrical engineers

We’re a neural engineering company that just raised $110M led by Khosla. We’re looking for exceptional software/mechanical/electrical engineers. More: https://science.xyz/careers/. Feel free to reach out at joem@[ourdomain.xyz].
by GuinansEyebrows | 2025-06-04 21:19:33+00:00
maybe i overestimate. maybe i just appreciate the difference between the product and support for the product. for support, i understand a more-bespoke pricing model, but it'd be nice if there was at least some upfront inkling of how much i have to open my organization's veins in exchange for a working implementation.

interacting with capital is a cynical act. capitalism is predatory but it's necessary to interact with it. if you're not cynical, you risk being taken for a worse ride than you have to be. this isn't me handwaving things; it's a fundamental aspect to how i see the world. cynicism doesn't have to be a simple doom-and-gloom "well, everything is bad, end of discussion" (regardless of my personal feelings about it) - it can be a tool to make sure you're able to interact with systems in ways that benefit you and others while retaining whatever modicum of control you can - because even if you aren't, your vendor is (or they're on their way to being out of business as a profit-motivated entity).
by haxton | 2025-06-04 21:19:51+00:00
> Custom OAuth implementation with user registration/login

Please don't. At 2 minute glance you are allowing empty state (csrf) and bearer tokens in query string[0], not checking if token is expired or not[1], storing secrets in plain text / not salting[2], missing PKCE Validation, debug mode always on, redirect URL only checking if includes (127.0.0.1.evil.com works)[3] so much...

Please, please, please don't recommend this for any production usage.

[0] https://github.com/f/mcp-cloudflare-boilerplate/blob/master/... [1] https://github.com/f/mcp-cloudflare-boilerplate/blob/master/... [2] https://github.com/f/mcp-cloudflare-boilerplate/blob/master/... [3] https://github.com/f/mcp-cloudflare-boilerplate/blob/master/...
by xp84 | 2025-06-04 21:20:32+00:00
This is so true. The modern Mac is a sea of Allow/Don't Allow prompts, mixed with the slightly more infantilizing alternative of the "Block" / "Open System Preferences" where you have to prove you know what you're doing by manually browsing for the app to grant the permission to, to add it to the list of ones with whatever permission.

They're just two different approaches with the same flaw: People with no clue how tech works cannot completely protect themselves from any possible attacker, while also having sophisticated networked features. Nobody has provided a decent alternative other than some kind of fully bubble-wrapped limited account using Group Policies, to ban all those perms from even being asked for.
by ww520 | 2025-06-04 21:20:59+00:00
> I kept going because I wanted to understand the BEAM properly. There’s value in following the real logic, not just the surface explanations.

Teaching is the best way to learn. I found that out when I started tutoring classmates for math in high school.

Same thing with writing a book. Something about learning a subject and turning around to speak/write out about it that really crystallizes the in-depth understanding beneath the surface.
by jq-r | 2025-06-04 21:21:18+00:00
I test drove 3 and Y recently and was very impressed. They are very comfortable to ride, be in, silent, roomy and simple to operate which I cannot say the same for German cars in the same range. Those seem to be stuck in "we've built these cars for decades, let's just put an electric motor, add eye candy, high price and call it electric cars". Teslas are considerably cheaper to buy than german cars with the same amount of kit in my country. You always have a feeling they are nickel and diming you for every single thing.
by throwawaymaths | 2025-06-04 21:21:38+00:00
> don't believe the concept of DNA can be reduced

followed by examples of things that are encoded by DNA. Fro example, sure, maybe you'll miss bootstrapping methylation on a first pass but the idea of methylation is there in the DNA, and if you didnt have "methylation in the right place" more than likely some generation (N) would.

to wit, i dont think there is strong evidence of an "ice-9" in the epigenome that brings about a spark of life that can't easily be triggered by chance given a template lacking it.

so there's probably not something intrinsically missing from DNA as an encoding medium vs say "casually" missing from any given piece of DNA.

if you want something a bit stronger than an assertion, the DNA used to bootstrap m. capricolum into Syn1 lacked all the decorations (made in yeast) and was not locked into higher order structure (treated with protease prior to transplantation)
by tombakt | 2025-06-04 21:21:39+00:00
No, a preflight (OPTIONS) request is sent by the browser first prior to sending the request initiated by the application. I would be surprised if it is possible for the client browser to control this OPTIONS request more than just the URL. I am curious if anyone else has any input on this topic though.

Maybe there is some side-channel timing that can be used to determine the existence of a device, but not so sure about actually crafting and delivering a malicious payload.
by hollerith | 2025-06-04 21:21:41+00:00
>we don't do the things other countries do to respond because those things would broadly be perceived as improving the lot of most citizens, and Americans do not generally believe that is possible anymore.

Americans have always had a (healthy IMHO) distrust of radical changes in our system of government while being unusually open to economic changes and technological changes that transform our society. I judge that the average American remains significantly more open to the latter than the average person in the world; do you disagree?
by rconti | 2025-06-04 21:21:54+00:00
Reminds me of my first Ibis encounter, in Brisbane. I was at an outdoor dining area in Southbank. There were signs warning people to beware of the ibis, and that the restaurant would not replace your food if it was taken by an ibis.

I sat down at a table, and there was a spray bottle with the condiments, promisingly-labeled "ibis spray". "Great", I thought to myself. "The ibis must hate whatever liquid they put in here". I was expecting maybe soapy water, or a lemon juice solution, or something.

I began eating, and a massive ibis landed next to me, and looked at me, threateningly. I wasn't scared. I held my ground, confidently reaching over to the ibis spray. I knew exactly how to fix this problem.

I aimed the ibis spray at the creature, and pulled the trigger.

What I now believe to be tap water shot out and struck the ibis, who did not even blink as it stared at me menacingly.

"Oh shit", I thought.
by AnimalMuppet | 2025-06-04 21:21:59+00:00
1. Yarvin's system may work well if you put perfect people in place, and keep perfect people in place. Well, that's true of a lot of systems. Yarvin finds flaws in democracy with imperfect people, but his system needs perfect people in order to work. That's... not an improvement.

2. Even if you have these perfect people, they're going to be rare. Who's going to put them in power? The mass of non-perfect people? Why are they going to do that?

3. Yarvin fails his own test. He's looking for people whose blogs create no negative reactions? Yarvin stands self-condemned; he's not worthy to say how things should be run.
by PoEdict | 2025-06-04 21:22:06+00:00
> Instead of trying to glue modalities together into a patchwork AGI, we should pursue approaches to intelligence that treat embodiment and interaction with the environment as primary, and see modality-centered processing as emergent phenomena.

Right so it’s embodied in a computer and humans are part of its environment that provide emergent experience to the AI to observe.

The author glued modalities together by linking a body (a modal), environment (a modal), emergence (a modal).

How does anything emerge if forces do not collaborate? The effects of gravity and electromagnetism do not act in a vacuum but a reality of stuff.

Poetic exchange may engage some but Maxwell didn’t make electromagnetism “work” until he got rid of the imagined pulleys and levers to foster a metaphor.

Not sure the point being suggested exists except as too bespoke an emergent property of language itself to apply usefully elsewhere.

Transformers came along and revealed a whole lot of theory of consciousness to be useless pulleys and levers. Why is this theory not just more words attempting to instill the existence of non-essential essentials?
by kridsdale3 | 2025-06-04 21:22:50+00:00
They do. The UI to do this is apparently only included in the VisionOS version of the Photos app. But you can convert any photo in your album to "Spatial Format" as long as it has a Depth Map, or is high enough resolution for the ML approximation to be good enough.

It also reads EXIF to "scale" the image's physical dimensions to match the field of view of the original capture, so wide-angle photos are physically much larger in VR-Space than telephoto.

In my opinion, this button and feature alone justifies the $4000 I spent on the device. Seeing photos I took with my Nikon D7 in 2007, in full 3D and correct scale, triggers nostalgia and memories I've forgotten I had for many years. It was quite emotional.

Apple is dropping the ball on not making this the primary selling-point of Vision Pro. It's incredible.
by lillecarl | 2025-06-04 21:23:42+00:00
I've got no experience, but I imagine you don't have to interface with C++ too often, and when you do it's probably unlikely someone haven't written a wrapper library already. That's how the entire Python ecosystem works, either someone has made a wrapper, you make a wrapper or you use subprocess if the library has a CLI and you're not in a performance sensitive part of execution.

Any language that makes programming easier is good. Modern C++ is also quite good, but I feel like there are more "nice to haves" in other languages. Reflection is one, for serializing things without boilerplate and his uncle. And just reflecting on types in general can be nice.
by xenadu02 | 2025-06-04 21:23:55+00:00
No. There's too much of it for that.

If this missing mass were in the form of dust the entire night sky (relatively speaking) should be full of dust reflecting light and radiating infrared due to being lit by starlight for billions of years. But we don't.

If the missing mass were in rogue planets, brown dwarfs, or even cold dwarf stars there would need to be so very many of them that we should be detecting them by the millions with our current telescopes as they pass between us and distant stars. But we don't.

The better our telescopes get the more and more certain we are that the missing mass is not normal matter as we know it. We are getting really good at spotting dim objects (or their side-effects) even when hidden by the glare of stars. Normal matter but not radiating much energy just can't hide from us well enough to account for the missing mass.
by jvanderbot | 2025-06-04 21:24:02+00:00
"processed" is also a modern scapegoat, unfortunately.

But all three are correct, I think: Food has gotten more laden with sugar, seed oils, and carbs because it's processed to be that way after we tried to go Low Fat for so long.

A conscientious vegetarian is probably eating damn near an ideal diet by avoiding all that.