MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by GuB-42 | 2025-06-04 12:23:48+00:00
There may be a nutritional reason, but my very personal and subjective reason is that peanuts don't taste that good compared to the other nuts.

And I don't think I am the only one. Generally, when I put a bowl of cashews and a bowl of peanuts on the table as a snack for guests, the bowl of cashews empties first, most people only eat the peanuts when there are no more cashews.

Peanuts are not bad, and they are cheap, but I'd rather have the other nuts.
by Nursie | 2025-06-04 12:23:50+00:00
> hilarious little jerks.

We had a galah chewing our hosepipe the other day. I pointed and said "oi!" and the little scamp stopped, straightened up, looked me right in the eye and ... did it again.

Oh and not to forget the kookas. I heard a pop and noise like water a few weeks ago, and ran into our living room. Outside the main window there's that hose reel mounted on the wall that was spraying freely against the glass. A kookaburra had somehow pulled the hozelock end off and was taking a shower.
by Caelus9 | 2025-06-04 12:23:54+00:00
Watching cockatoos figure out stuff like this really makes me wonder have we been seriously underestimating bird intelligence all this time? We tend to associate tool use with primates, but parrots, corvids, and kea keep proving us wrong in the smartest ways. Honestly, maybe “avian cognition” deserves its own category of advanced problem solving. There’s probably a lot we could learn from their behavior not just about animals, but about ourselves and the systems we build.
by dns_snek | 2025-06-04 12:24:03+00:00
We shouldn't be discussing how to most effectively infringe upon people's personal liberties before first discussing whether there's one iota of evidence that these liberties are to blame for extremely serious issues you mentioned. The root cause of these problems is almost certainly a lot closer to the general state of economic and social hardship than porn.

Of course it's a lot easier for those in power to divert attention to a moral panic like porn instead of acknowledging that our economic system and core values are making people depressed and hopeless to the point that they're becoming incapable of performing the one thing they've been optimizing for over millions of years of evolution - reproducing.
by TeMPOraL | 2025-06-04 12:24:08+00:00
> This is alarmingly incorrect. Extra curricular activities, clubs, sports, and music work exceptionally well at keeping kids too busy to indulge in pornography or other unacceptable habits like drugs.

Ha ha, if only.

You're forgetting the liminal space - the transition periods. Unless you're going to personally hand your kid off to a teacher and then pick them up afterwards, exactly on the minute the activities start and end, leaving exactly zero time for them to interact with other kids with little supervision, kids will find a way.

And if you actually manage to do that, you'll be severely damaging their social development, hindering their ability to function in society as independent adult, possibly for life. This is arguably much, much worse than them smoking a few cigarettes and watching some porn.
by jsiepkes | 2025-06-04 12:24:36+00:00
"make sure it's not doing bad things" is never going to happen. Just look at the XZ attack (which is written in C) or the "The International Obfuscated C Code Contest" [1].

Also you might want to read "Reflections on Trusting Trust" [2].

[1] https://www.ioccc.org/

[2] https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~rdriley/487/papers/Thompson_1984_Ref...
by diggan | 2025-06-04 12:24:53+00:00
I guess there are two things at play. What "ground up rebuild" really means, and a mismatch between what the video says and what the article says.

The video, at the 300s mark (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gTd36cQLzY&t=300s) mentions the current state, and where they are right now, and that they'd need funding to reach the last step. And that it would be a shame to lose the previous steps, when they're "so close" or whatever. So just doing that last step, while keeping the previous ones intact, wouldn't really be "rebuilding from the ground up", at least in my opinion.

But then yeah, the article says "rebuilding things from the ground up" but I'm not sure that's really "tear everything including the community down and start from scratch" but more about how to build "Version 5", about the machines and hardware itself.

But that's me trying to be charitable and understand something that isn't 100% clearly outlined, as you say.
by ZeroGravitas | 2025-06-04 12:26:12+00:00
I prefer to not get my physics lessons from political scientist climate-deniers in WSJ op-eds.

https://www.desmog.com/bjorn-lomborg/

> Since March 2023 Lomborg has been an advisory board member of the Alliance for Responsible Citizenship6, a group co-founded by Jordan B Peterson which includes a number of high-profile climate deniers on its advisory board member.
by oersted | 2025-06-04 12:26:16+00:00
I don't disagree, but let's not forget that there is a significant difference with main things that are age-gated right now: alcohol, tobacco, driving...

It's not just about addiction or mental health, it's a whole different ballgame. These things carry big real-world physical risks, potentially deadly. Minors literally have different brain chemistries as they develop, and drugs can cause long-lasting effects unlike in adults.

Even gambling is not age-gated as strictly, with massive potential negative impacts to your livelyhood.

For the rest of things that might cause some psychological harm (maybe, hard to verify), like movies or videogames, we just have recommendations and some light barriers. Elevating porn to the top category is therefore quite a significant move, it is not the same.
by miltava | 2025-06-04 12:26:19+00:00
Im not op and I’m not sure they are using it for money laundering.

A money launderer can use a marketplace by creating a seller account and buying from himself. Since he’s the one buying he doesn’t need to deliver anything but he gets the money from a legit source. Usually he would use a payment method as close to money as possible so that it leaves less traces. But in OPs case, the amounts are low so he needs too many transactions to get something valuable. And because of the disputes, he’s (probably) not getting the money (?).

It could be card testing: the fraudster has a bunch of cards and doesn’t know which is valid or canceled. The best way to find out is to test in a real site. So he’ll test out each of them and the ones that go through are good to use elsewhere. The thing is that it would be better for him not to dispute the transactions so the OP would take much longer to find out about the scheme and shut it down. It’s better to use low amount transactions in this case so it doesn’t use too much of the credit available for him to defraud and probably doesn’t warn the card owner.

Another option is doing it just to hurt the OP marketplace. If you have too many disputes the brands can fine you and if you don’t solve the problem they can turn your account off. I’ve seen it happen when a competitor was trying to hurt the e-commerce. It’s a low move and rare but it happens.

One thing that might help is to analyze the sellers too. In a money laundering and even in the other settings, it could be part of the scheme. Are they new accounts? Are their volume exploding out of nowhere? Etc
by lotsofpulp | 2025-06-04 12:26:22+00:00
The human driver is responsible and liable, that is why the interior camera monitors the person’s eyes to remind them to watch the road, and I think disabled driver assist software after 3 strikes.

https://www.tesla.com/ownersmanual/models/en_us/GUID-E5FF5E8...

> WARNING Full Self-Driving (Supervised) is a hands-on feature. Keep your hands on the steering yoke (or steering wheel) at all times, be mindful of road conditions and surrounding traffic, and always be prepared to take immediate action. Failure to follow these instructions could cause damage, serious injury or death. It is your responsibility to familiarize yourself with the limitations of Full Self-Driving (Supervised) and the situations in which it may not work as expected.
by foldr | 2025-06-04 12:26:28+00:00
You can also see lots of videos online of cockatoos playing the shell game, e.g. https://youtube.com/shorts/Pu6O_iOZIO4?si=WEko4pfOekdGIbgF

What I love about these is that you can see that the cockatoo clearly knows that it’s playing a game. It doesn’t tip over the cup to get the reward (or just tip over all the cups, which is the easiest solution if you don’t care about the game). It just indicates which cup is the right one.
by roxolotl | 2025-06-04 12:27:21+00:00
> We've built something beyond what we imagined, and instead of being curious, many are dismissive and denying its capabilities. What is that?

I’ll keep saying this but the problem is the hype. The AI is Normal Technology[0] piece is the first piece that made me even remotely excited. The hype destroys everything positive about the technology because it totally fills the discussion space with nonsense. For many it feels like fruit from the poison tree both because the data was acquired using dubious means and the people selling AI are only interested in world domination.

Of course it’s going to be transformative. Of course it’s a powerful tool. Of course it has limitations. Of course some people are going to make boat loads of money. Of course some people are going to lose a lot of money. Same as it was with many other technologies that changed everything.

0: https://knightcolumbia.org/content/ai-as-normal-technology
by infecto | 2025-06-04 12:27:49+00:00
Are you referring to yourself? Keyword I said was investment. Most of the folks on those types of forums are simply gamblers or wishful thinkers.

Again my only point before you took it to this level was that industry knowledge is not an edge it’s table stakes when making an investment in the public markets. Having that experience or knowledge is not niche or unique and something that can be purchased with a handful of expert interviews.
by diggan | 2025-06-04 12:28:31+00:00
It seems the law allows either a government website, or 3rd party provider for the age checks, it doesn't mandate either.

> Use an age verification provider that is legally and technically independent of any online platform hosting or providing porn content - https://www.yoti.com/blog/france-age-verification-law-adult-...

So, could be a government website, but likely for-profit companies will try to capture it by any means necessary, the very least a lot of lobbying.
by Gigachad | 2025-06-04 12:28:57+00:00
I wanted a custom kigurumi like these[1] but didn’t want to fork over thousands of dollars for one. Ended up buying a sewing machine and fleece, learning to sew while making it. Was a bit of a brutal first project but after about 2 months off and on work in my free time I was able to complete it. Was then able to make 5 more of them for friends. The later ones were significantly easier.

Also made myself a custom plushie which would have cost around $1000AUD had I commissioned someone to make it.

After doing it all, I can say, yeah the prices actually are fair if you need to actually make a living off it, but also you can just do it yourself with a $300 sewing machine and some determination.

[1] https://www.curlworks.net/kigurumi
by mananaysiempre | 2025-06-04 12:28:57+00:00
I mean, it’s not hard as such, the encodings of some instruction sets are just ass, with 32- and 64-bit x86 as the foremost example and Thumb-2 not far behind it. Also, if you’re dynamically patching existing code, you’ll have to contend with both modern OSes (especially “hardening” patches thereto) making your life harder in bespoke incompatible ways (see: most of libffi) and modern CPUs being very buggy around self-modifying code. Other than that, it just takes quite a bit of tedious but straightforward work to get anywhere.
by throwaway366363 | 2025-06-04 12:28:59+00:00
distribution mechanisms and the style of porn available has significantly changed in the past 20 or so years (when i was 13). so its not fair to compare then and now. the current situation has some noteable differences.

no phones back then to stream full videos in the playground or on the school bus or in lessons or at work in the toilets or on a bus to work etc etc. needed a laptop or a porn mag or your parents being out to use the computer.

there was been a significant shift towards SEO based production as well around 10/15 years ago. which meant more “stepdad and stepdaughter” [0] or “stepbrother and stepsister” videos. there’s the more hardcore stuff i.e. where a woman is being slapped, thrown around, choked and generally treated pretty nastily. that used to be “niche” stuff, now it’s fairly mainstream [1]

i don’t remember seeing either of those ^ classes of porn when i was 13.

[0]: there was a brief period where it was “dad and daughter” filling up all the feeds on every site and the sites quickly noped the fuck outta that and forced video name changes (whether it was regulatory or not i dunno)

[1]: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-56640178

—

> A veteran porn star said in a recent documentary about porn that, in the 1990s, it constituted “making love on a bed,” and having “lovey dovey sex”. But in 2010, researchers analysed more than 300 porn scenes and found that 88% contained physical aggression. Most of the perpetrators were male, and their targets female, and the latter’s most common response to aggression was to show pleasure or respond neutrally.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/future/article/20170926-is-porn-harmfu...
by Ukv | 2025-06-04 12:29:20+00:00
> Only if you have domain knowledge [...]

It's common to have a reasonable intuitive sense for whether something works as a birthday party yet be stumped when coming up with ideas. Or be able to see that a word ends in "um" and is a real word/place you recognise (or double click -> search if not) without necessarily being able to list many yourself if asked. I don't mean to say that verification requires absolutely zero knowledge, just that it can be (and often is) substantially easier, so I don't think insane_dreamer's reasoning holds.

> this supposes that the AI provides a link for every fact.

For andrewmutz's LLM, it was the statement "the user has the ability to easily double check the results whenever they like" that was suggested made it unnecessary in the first place.

Outside of that case, people have the choice to use the LLM that best suits their task - and most popular ones I'm aware of do support search/RAG.

Certainly possible to waste time by doing something like what your wife's professor seemingly did (get non-link "citations" generated by an LLM without search/RAG, then send them to someone who'll probably infer "these must exist somewhere because the sender read them" opposed to "these were vaguely recalled from memory so may not exist") - I don't recommend doing that.

> secondly, if I have to click through every link and read through the source to determine whether details of a "summary" are correct or not, that really does not save me much time from conducting a search and looking through the linked sources myself

A lot of LLM responses are for the kind of thing that doesn't need verification, or for which verification doesn't depend on checking the source. For situations where checking the source is relevant, that's typically just going to be the source for the part you're interested in - in the same way a Wikipedia article can provide a useful lead without needing to check every source the article cites. Anecdotally I find that, while far from perfect, it saves a lot of time when it can surface information that would've otherwise required digging through a dozen or so sources.
by klabb3 | 2025-06-04 12:30:15+00:00
Yeah. I never liked the blackbox property (it works but we don’t know why). But the second order effect that we’re witnessing now is basically ”we are going to assume it’s good at everything unless proven otherwise”. This to me is religious. When you ask why is it not able to do X? And you get the answer ”just wait a year, it’s constantly getting better”. Ok, but at least we can try to be curious about the boundaries. The fact that our understanding is way behind is not a good thing, no matter if you’re an optimist or pessimist.
by palata | 2025-06-04 12:30:49+00:00
> punishing distribution but not consumption will do nothing

I'm not so sure. Say you want to prevent children from accessing social media. Would you fine a child for that? Put them in jail?

On the other hand, it's pretty easy to ask Meta to verify the age. There are not a gazillion social medias out there: force them all to verify the age, and most children won't have access to them anymore.
by mdp2021 | 2025-06-04 12:30:52+00:00
I checked this to vet after the "WTF?!" title. It's legit.

It's a satirical piece, from the author of Ruby-on-Rails, about how Danish mentality tends to bring old instances to new forms (making "piety" a "superstition", technically speaking - the residual of a formerly sensible idea after its substance is gone).
by imglorp | 2025-06-04 12:31:32+00:00
> Separation of concerns

Sorta: yes the container is immutable and can be restarted, but when it does, it has the same privs and creds to phone up the same DB again or mount the same filesystem again. I'd argue touching the data is always the problem you're concerned about. If you can get an exec in that container you can own its data.
by jebarker | 2025-06-04 12:31:41+00:00
I question whether the author's story about their mother's farm stand is really about unled lives in the past sense. They seem to be telling a cautionary tale about it but his mother was trying to change her future life in the present. I don't think that warning about dwelling on possible past lives and suggesting you shouldn't make changes in your current life are the same thing.

Probably relatedly though, I never really think about how things could have been and yet I am haunted by disatissfaction (despite having a great life) and always looking for how I'll change myself or my situation (work mostly) going forward. Maybe these are two views on the same neurosis.
by ljm | 2025-06-04 12:32:21+00:00
The key piece to that is creativity. I've encountered a fair few people who basically just have the sales nous and the cash, like the Silicon Valley version of "I've got an idea for an app," but the money isn't put to good use in building an effective team and you essentially have to bring all of the vision, direction and creativity to the table so the founder can take the credit and cash out on it all a few years later.

The other side of that is when the startup struggles, it's the product and eng team's fault and not the founder's. This is fine if it's clear up-front that they're just bankrolling the op and not actually leading it.
by lotsofpulp | 2025-06-04 12:32:22+00:00
Every mutually exclusive choice is a tradeoff, by definition. Perhaps the better word is “driving better than human drivers as a collective” to refer to a lower auto collision/injury rate.

It might not be strictly more capable than a single ideal human always paying attention, but that is neither here nor there when comparing if software assisted driving is better than non software assisted driving.

The easiest way to analyze this is to see if auto insurance companies offer a discount for using the software assist, as they are most directly impacted by population wide changes in the metric we are interested in (although I don’t think Tesla shares sufficient data about when and if FSD was used for auto insurers to be able to discern this).
by gmuslera | 2025-06-04 12:32:57+00:00
Right now, between 200 and 100000 species go extinct each year. Those are the unintentional ones, and the rate is probably growing a we climb the ladder of global warming. Even if we eradicate all mosquitoes species (around 3500) in absolute number is not so much compared with what we are actually doing without trying. And other species, less harmful, could take their spot in the ecosystem.

Yes, it would be something destructive, but you should notice the elephant in the room.
by diggan | 2025-06-04 12:33:05+00:00
> The website and the payment processor know exactly who you are and what you are doing

As far as I understand, the implementation would let the porn website verify you're above 18, and the payment processor would only know that you interacted with a age verification service to verify your age, but not specifically what website is asking you to verify your age. That would seem good enough in terms of privacy, unless I'm missing something?
by lolinder | 2025-06-04 12:33:11+00:00
Who is this "they" who have forfeited it?

What about the millions of software developers who have never even visited a pirate site, much less built one?

Are we including the Netflix developers working actively on DRM?

How about the software developers working on anti-circumvention code for Kindle?

I'm totally perplexed at how willing you are to lump a profession of more than 20 million people all into one bucket and deny all of them, collectively, the right to say anything about IP. Are doctors not allowed to talk about the society harms of elective plastic surgery because some of them are plastic surgeons? Is anyone with an MBA not allowed to warn people against scummy business practices because many-to-most of them are involved in dreaming those practices up?

This logic makes no sense, and I have to imagine that you see that given that you're avoiding replying to me.
by QuadmasterXLII | 2025-06-04 12:33:56+00:00
Anything that we are good at treating doesn’t seem like an age related disease anymore, but we’re really clearing out the scourges if you look at historical cause of death statistics. We haven’t made any progress on Alzheimer’s, and have conquered yellow fever, consumption, diabetes, knee failure, glaucoma, smoking related lung cancer, prostate cancer, hookworm, environmental lead poisoning, environmental arsenic poisoning, black lung, breast cancer, and syphilis. So, if you know someone old and suffering, its probably alzheimers.
Ask HN: Anonymized Distance Between Geolocations
by supernihil | 2025-06-04 12:34:47+00:00
I am thinking a lot about whether there exists a form of algo for calculating a distance between two users without exposing either location to oneanother.

I am thinking a sort of hanshake like DH.

case: User a wants to know the geodistance to user b and vice versa
Show HN: Invdual.com
by wscld | 2025-06-04 12:35:35+00:00
Consolidate your digital presence into a single, easy-to-create, and shareable page. It’s perfect for professionals, content creators, or anyone looking to present themselves authentically and organized.

if you want to test it: https://invdual.com check my profile page to see how it looks like: https://wescld.invdual.com
Show HN: JSON-RPC Debugger. Pause, inspect, and modify calls in real-time
by superfreek | 2025-06-04 12:36:11+00:00
I work with JSON-RPC and OpenRPC a lot and this was a much needed missing tool in my toolset. So I put together this JSON-RPC Debugger.

Pause, inspect, and modify every call in real-time.

Built in rust /w ratatui, inspired by proxyfor, lazyvim and Charles Proxy.

I'm getting a lot of use out of it debugging Ethereum and even MCP server JSON-RPC calls.