MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by amiga386 | 2025-06-02 09:16:49+00:00
...but it's unique while the file exists, right?

The combination of st_dev and st_ino from stat() should be unique on a machine, while the device remains mounted and the file continues to exist.

If the file is deleted, a different file might get the inode, and if a device is unmounted, another device might get the device id.
by kevincox | 2025-06-02 09:16:58+00:00
The way I see it is you are deciding between making the instant very clear or making their "time of day" clear.

But IMHO "time of day" is less important because 1. People in the same time zone still have different schedules so it is an approximation anyways. 2. If you know what instant is being discussed it is very easy for each person to relate it to their personal schedule.

So I agree that switching costs aside using UTC would be better overall.
by sizzle | 2025-06-02 09:16:58+00:00
I wonder if the next generation of dads will be teaching their kids how to ‘vibe code’ with fun and simple prompting in the age of LLMs.

This is readily accessible to non tech savvy parents and was never an option before, but here we are in 2025 with AI coding tools front and center.

What about using LLMs to help break down the concepts in kid friendly terms, lowering the cognitive load for exhausted parents.

I can even see it as an extension of your lesson plan, further guiding them like a virtual tutor version of yourself. Thoughts?
by throwaway71271 | 2025-06-02 09:17:27+00:00
Google uses a lot of user feedback data to rate the content, chatgpt cant do that, maybe its for the better, e.g. now chatgpt imports 0 star completely unknown libraries from github into my project, it read their code and deemed useful, but there is no way I would've heard about them without it.

Popularity is somewhat proxy for 'good', but not always.
by strogonoff | 2025-06-02 09:18:12+00:00
A misconception I frequently see repeated is that if something can be copied effortlessly, then that becomes an argument for abolishing the concept of ownership in that domain.

The mistake here is seeing it as a zero-sum game. The goal of IP rights is not to prevent party A from “depriving” party B of their property. Believe it or not, understanding that copying IP does not destroy the original is not some galaxy brain level thinking only available to the enlightened. Rather, the goal is to encourage the creativity and innovation that produces more of such intellectual property overall; offering a degree of control over your own IP is a mechanism[0] of getting there.

A shining example of that is copyleft licensing. The concept of IP ownership powers GPL: in order to say “you must contribute back or disclose your source”, in order to give the assurance that programmer contributions will benefit the world rather than get embraced and extinguished by a megacorp, you must be able to execute the aforementioned control over the IP. Free and open software—including gems like Linux (probably the most popular OS in the world), Blender, etc.—flourished because of this control, not despite it. Many people, in their self-righteous crusade for free movies and stuff, completely miss that point.

So, if anything, it is the opposite. The difficulty of stealing or copying a physical object already acts as a natural deterrent, which is why something that can be expropriated with no effort should require more explicit protection, not less. This should make intuitive sense to anyone who can see the value of intellectual property and it being the driving force of innovation.

[0] If someone has an alternative mechanism in mind, I welcome a description of how it would work.
by BeetgeK | 2025-06-02 09:19:19+00:00
Until now, Qodana linters have run exclusively in Docker containers. This provided consistency and isolation. It also required effort for environment configuration, particularly for complex project setups or highly secured systems.

Users had to rely on the bootstrap mechanism to set up custom environments inside the Docker container, often duplicating the configuration work for other builds. This redundancy could be cumbersome,but has changed now.
by chiph | 2025-06-02 09:19:49+00:00
I had that. Later renamed Laser C. Being a poor college student I used a Radio Shack floppy disk drive for a second 3.5", hand-soldering the DIN connector the ST used. Afterwards I could have my compiler tools on one and source/object code on the other - a huge time saver.

Try and get a compiler and linker to fit in 360k these days!
by tsimionescu | 2025-06-02 09:20:00+00:00
This is a very strange question. With repeating decimals, it is technically possible, though very complicated, to do arithmetic directly on the representations. You have to remember a bunch of extra rules, but it can be done.

However, with numbers that have non-repeating inifinite decimal expansions, it is completely imposible to do arithmetic in the decimal notation. I'm not exagerating: it's literally physically impossible to represent on paper the result of doing 3pi in decimal notation in an unambiguous form other than 3pi. It's also completely impossible to use the decimal expansion of pi to compute that pi / pi = 1.

Here, I'll show you what it would be like to try:

pi / pi = 3.141592653589793238462643383279502884197169399375105820949445923078164062862089986280348253421170679821480865132820664709384460955058223172....

Now, of course you can do arithmetic with certain approximations of pi. For example, I can do this:

pi / pi ≈ 3.1415 / 3.1415 = 1

Or even

3 × pi ≈ 3 × 3 = 9

But this is not doing arithmetic with the decimal expansion of pi, this is doing arithmetic with rational numbers that are close enoigh to pi for some purpose (that has to be defined).
by susam | 2025-06-02 09:20:19+00:00
Recently, I reached a personal milestone: completing 200 content pages on my website. [1] I wasn't really keeping track, but yesterday, I noticed I had published 200 pages on my website. It just quietly happened over the years. Only took 24 years!

By content pages, I mean stuff like blog posts, articles, notes, tools, web games, geek art, etc. (not stuff like index pages, tag list pages, and so on). I mostly write for myself. I do often share my posts on HN and sometimes they get some attention, but most of the time, they do not.

All these pages (posts, tools, games, etc.) serve as a personal record of my journey through various technical interests, from the early days of solving mathematical puzzles and writing assembly programs in MS-DOS with DEBUG.EXE, to my current study of algebraic structures and the quirks of Python programming.

Each page is like a snapshot of a phase of my life. Sometimes, I browse my own website just to enjoy the journey it has captured and to remind myself of the things I've learnt over the years.

[1] https://susam.net/pages.html
by kvemkon | 2025-06-02 09:22:42+00:00
> Raspberry Pi OS Bookworm

> g++ (Debian 12.2.0-14) 12.2.0

> cargo 1.87.0 (99624be96 2025-05-06)

Looks like cargo is not from OS repo. So either use both outdated gcc and rust from RaspiOS or install the recent gcc-15 from experimental.
by Someone | 2025-06-02 09:23:50+00:00
“Infinities are weird” might satisfy your criteria.

It surfaces in such things as

- why do we consider 0.9̅ and 1 to represent the same number?

- why are there ‘as many’ even integers as there are integers, and ‘as many’ integers as there are natural numbers?

- why are not all infinites equal?

If you don’t know/accept these, you’ll keep using intuition that served you well for many, many problems on finite sets on problems involving infinite sets, with disastrous results.
by librasteve | 2025-06-02 09:23:59+00:00
made a PR for raku, hope it gets accepted

some cool things stood out:

sub fixangle($a) { $a mod 360 } # raku has built-in support for Euclidean modulo pi # raku has pi # Solve equation of Kepler my $e = $M; my $delta; repeat { # raku's repeat loop allows initialisation of delta to be folded in $delta = $e - $eccent * sin($e) - $M; $e -= $delta / (1 - $eccent * cos($e)); } while abs($delta) > 1e-6;
by quietbritishjim | 2025-06-02 09:24:03+00:00
In fairness, updating to a range-based for loop would give the same effective code as using iterators manually in the loop as they have done. I'm not convinced any new features in C++23 (after C++11) would have given a performance improvement - was there something you had in mind?

The choice of std::list is a bit more dubious. Looking at the code (I found a mirror [1]), it seems like it's mostly for appending and iterating but there is pop_front in one place. Maybe std::deque would be better? Or std::vector with an iterator noting the effective start? Or maybe they were deliberately choosing a poor data structure to stress the compiler (and if so the OP should've used a linked list in Rust for fairness). The article doesn't comment so we can only guess their motivation.

[1] https://github.com/hundt98847/multi-language-bench/blob/mast...
by throwaway31131 | 2025-06-02 09:24:06+00:00
I think one other piece is one needs to understand the number is not being built, the whole representation exists all at once. When I tutor students the confusion is they think of each 9 like a brick being added to a wall and for them the wall is never done, that’s their argument why 0.999 doesn’t equal 1. Then when you explain numbers don’t have a time dimension they usually get it.
by CuriouslyC | 2025-06-02 09:24:35+00:00
There's a difference between a sample and something inspired by something but also significantly different. The copyright laws around music are kind of draconian so it's not a good analogy for code anyhow, imagine a world where a fundamental do while loop had 90 year copyright protection, and that's the sort of world we'd be living in if code copyright was like music copyright.
by oldpersonintx2 | 2025-06-02 09:25:49+00:00
> If AI undermines the incentives for human beings to update the web with their news, opinions and arguments, it will also cut off its own future

no

new content being generated daily is no longer sufficient as training data, which is why there is so much effort being put into using AIs to generate quality volume training data for the next generation of AIs
by atombender | 2025-06-02 09:26:10+00:00
No, it's just incomplete. The same code just needs to unwrap:

for err != nil { switch e := err.(type) { case UserNotFound: writeJSONResponse(w, 404, "User not found") return case interface { Timeout() bool }: if e.Timeout() { writeJSONResponse(w, 503, "Timeout") return } } err = errors.Unwrap(err) }
by throwawayffffas | 2025-06-02 09:26:45+00:00
> You mean trained to say they aren't right?

I am not sure what you mean. If you are trying to pass the Turing test saying, "yes I am a machine" is an automatic failure. Out of the box they do that, you have to prompt them somehow to not do that.

> Don't you think persona-of-thought prompting is more than just saying you're not an LLM...

I am sure it is. And yeah to pass a Turing test the LLM would have to invent a persona, or have it fed to it.
by oa335 | 2025-06-02 09:27:31+00:00
> a plurality of Israeli Jewish people are indigenous at least to the region.

Do you have a source for that?

Britannica says:

> The largest proportion of Jews trace their roots to Europe (including the former Soviet Union) and North America, though some also hail from Africa (mostly North Africa), Asia, and the Middle East.

https://www.britannica.com/place/Israel/Demographic-trends

I think this is partially supported by immigration statistics:

https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/total-immigration-to-is...
by brazzy | 2025-06-02 09:30:31+00:00
> It feels to me like “do the things you like” is a luxury of someone who isn’t anxious about paying all their bills.

The real lesson is that you should not rely on popularity-based success to pay your bills, because there is no knowing how long it will take until you have any success; it may in fact never come.

It's that kind of thing that should be the side hustle. You'll have only limited time for it, but at least you know how to pay your bills and can do it the way you want.

The other option is to be a starving artist who also feels bad about compromising their vision to make something marketable.
by stereolambda | 2025-06-02 09:32:18+00:00
The part how the whole system can be proved correct, but still break and bug out as handled and understood by its users and maintainers, to me summarizes practical problems with the formal trends in software engineering. Abstractions break all the time, starting with the type systems. Once you introduce something like this, you have to feed the system that you built, and then as a second consideration do what you actually want/have to do.

I can see the intellectual appeal and even the argument for formalism in some high-risk areas. I guess I am most burnt by the advent of hyperlinted, theatrically "typechecked" enterprise Python. I don't think people pushing this stuff would have the balls to introduce an actually formal environment, since even Java is there, not to mention ML-style languages, Rust etc. Maybe there's fear about the staffing and scary appearance, which the article also mentions. (I still sincerely wait for a bigger niche for functional and lispy shops, maybe when the industry transforms with de-monopolization.)

But there is a common thread in the bad kind of arguing for formalisms, where the Scotsmen are never true and your lazy human mind isn't Godlike enough to reason about the program correctly from the start. I actually like how TFA moves toward communicating better so maybe conversations could be more productive in these aspects.
by beAbU | 2025-06-02 09:32:25+00:00
The ultralight community never ceases to amaze me.

I always thought it was all about travel as light as possible

But I think it's more about travel with as many things as possible - the lightness of the objects is just an emergent requirement in order to not break your back.

I've done my fair share of hiking, longest being a 90km 5-day hike in the Namibian desert, with no facilities save for a river. Weight was a big factor, because you needed to pack food for at least 8 days to be safe and there is nowhere to get food once you start the hike. What equipment you pack and the weight of said equipment weight had to be kept at a minimum.

Having said that...

A chair or other seating arrangement was by a large margin the lowest priority item on my list. There is one giant chair under our feet the whole time: the ground. And if that is not suitable, finding a stump or a rock or whatever to sit on is really not that hard and it's infinitely more environmentally friendly.
by M4v3R | 2025-06-02 09:32:41+00:00
I underground that this is nothing more than a proof of concept but imagine what Apple itself could do with this idea if they truly embraced the concept and cut all the internal red tape that currently prevents them from doing so. This is what “Apple Intelligence” should be but never materialized (and at this point I have doubts it ever will, although I am curious what they’ll show off at WWDC this year).
by AnthonBerg | 2025-06-02 09:33:06+00:00
Interesting, right?

As a detail, I clearly experience the better bioavailability of Na-R-ALA. Often marketed as “stabilized”. As well as what I believe is the increased bioavailability of Na-R-ALA dissolved in water.

The main point I wanted to make is that it occurred to me when reading your comment that I know myself to be somewhat “oxidatively burdened”, if that’s a term? I have mild psoriasis, which is known to use oxidative and redox capacity in the immune system’s activation in the rash. (afaik immune cells “fire bullets” of oxidization at perceived intruders.) There are other stressors in my life which are also inherently oxidising in the molecular biology of it. I’d bet a nice bottle of Oban that that is a factor in the sense of relief.
by spoiler | 2025-06-02 09:33:24+00:00
I think what sets it apart from Jira is the balance between customisation and opinionated features I mentioned earlier. It will be useful a tool out of the box, but you can progressively enable a few extra features as your team grows.

I know on the surface it sounds a lot like Jira, but the execution is subtly better across the board. A lot of it is design/UX related too.

And lastly, it's very snappy. At previous job I had to wait seconds for between clicks for Jira to update. I don't know how that's considered okay by Atlassian (but I'm not sure if they upsell you "faster Jira" lol)

Another thing that stood out to me was their "Linear Method" posts https://linear.app/method
by mrweasel | 2025-06-02 09:33:42+00:00
> I'm not sure what your problem with that UI is tbh?

It's not a particularly efficient way to interact with the LLMs. Despite how people hate AI being integrated into everything, I do think that's the only way it can be done effectively. My take is that the AI/LLM isn't the product, it's just a feature of a product. Like when there's "AI" in the camera apps on your phone, or some sort of machine learning in medical imaging. To get the full benefit it needs to be a technology built into your product, not a product in it self.

The voice to text, text to voice is a good example. Voice to text is a feature of a transcription or video conference system. Text to voice is an accessibility feature. It doesn't matter that it's powered by an LLM.

If Claude, ChatGPT, whatever do become cheaper the market will crash. My thinking is: Prices go down (they will eventually), if that happens to fast, OpenAI will tank, their valuation is to high to support a $20 a month AI offering, or worse a world where ChatGPT isn't a product, but a feature. If OpenAI goes down the entire industry will have to re-align to a world where we now know that there's a limit to the value an LLM can command. Most of the current AI companies will be bought up at high discounts (as compared to their current valuations) and people are going to be laid off.
by GuB-42 | 2025-06-02 09:34:39+00:00
People absolutely talk about the permanent consequences that can arise from this.

But the problem with drug talk is that it is often no middle ground. On the one hand, authorities are going to tell you that any psychoactive substance stronger than coffee will kill you just by looking at it. I understand their position, discouraging people from taking drugs outside of a medical settings is a good idea in general, it includes most kinds of self-medication. But in the process, they generalize and overstate the potential harm, as if every drug was fentanyl.

But on the other hand, you have people who minimize the risks, saying how great these are and how evil government is preventing these miracle cures because big pharma profits or whatever.

The truth is between the two, there are real risks with drugs like ibogaine, dmt, and even cannabis. And there is a good chance taking these will make your life worse overall. But they also can make your life better, or they can be a fun trip. I put these in the category of "probably not good for you, but life would be boring if you never took risks and only did things that are good for you". The problem is that it is hard to find information from that perspective, you basically have to do you own research, with all that implies.
by spiffyk | 2025-06-02 09:35:52+00:00
You could also write the same piece about pretty much any language, by the way.

"Is it C?" – there is a big difference between C on Linux, C on Windows, C on an embedded chip doing real-time shenanigans...

"Is it Java?" – Desktop? Server? Android? Java ME? A CREDIT CARD?!?

The list goes on...
by mihaaly | 2025-06-02 09:35:53+00:00
Education itself is supposed to teach us learning, not the mere facts/methods, not just the hard knowledge. Hard knowledge comes with it anyway as some sort of 'side product'. You cant learn on nothing, something will be used for it, that something forms the hard knowledge eventually. Typically broad set but shallow hard knowledge.

Ironicly, this is what I feel chipping away in modern collaborative developments. The appreciation of learning capability. In the self interest of the organization (short term self interest, long term is too unpredictable, so does not exists in the practice) specific technical knowledge parcticed individuals are sought out for the purpose of easy replacement: not to be dependent on personnel, have it like a plug and play component. The ability to learn is not valuable while inside the organization. Should be practiced enough for years beforehand and applied intensely after joined. For the sake of claiming evolving organization the teaching may be outsourced in a very limited time to some sort of external enterprise making money on disseminating hard knowledge with made up examples or generic (artificial) applicability, instead of doing it in the actual context of the organization. Be part of the organization. Daily. Application of the new hard knowledge in the specific context of the organization will be casual by the random enthusiast. If they can break through of the company policy and established ways of management. Eventually the policies and practicies must be rigid as well, shouldn't they, so the personnel working in the management could be as easily replacable as the foot soldiers of code. For the sake of the organization. Call this approach the Organization Oriented Development.
by closewith | 2025-06-02 09:36:16+00:00
> Currently there aren't any restrictions, the political class is worried and people don't feel good about the maker of the products but that's it.

There very clearly is the restriction, upheld by courts again and again, that EU personal data cannot be processed on US clouds, including EU-based but US-owned clouds thanks to the US CLOUD ACT.

The political class and EU governments as a whole have kicked this can down the road several times, first with Safe Harbor, then Privacy Shield, and now the EU–US Data Privacy Framework which will inevitably fall.

> Europe, or any place will be stuck with niche small businesses as long as US has access to their markets.

This is just, well, untrue. Despite the oft-repeated claims to the contrary, the EU is an industrial and technological powerhouse.

What it doesn't have are US oligopolies, which are currently destroying the fabric of US society while being enormously profitable. That's a feature of the EU, not a bug.

> On Twitter you can find Euro tech boi's who will be repeating the same libertarian ideas as the US tech bros but the EU people make about as much as a successful restaurant and the US tech bros make often as much as a global restaurant chain or more.

Wealth inequality is a failure of US society, not a goal.
by totetsu | 2025-06-02 09:36:31+00:00
> "It would need access to our browser, an ability to drive that. It would need our credit card information to pay for the tickets. It would need access to our calendar, everything we're doing, everyone we're meeting. It would need access to Signal to open and send that message to our friends," she said. "It would need to be able to drive that across our entire system with something that looks like root permission, accessing every single one of those databases, probably in the clear because there's no model to do that encrypted."

Whittaker added that an AI agent powerful enough to do that would "almost certainly" process data off-device by sending it to a cloud server and back.

"So there's a profound issue with security and privacy that is haunting this sort of hype around agents, and that is ultimately threatening to break the blood-brain barrier between the application layer and the OS layer by conjoining all of these separate services, muddying their data, and doing things like undermining the privacy of your Signal messages," she said.

--Meredith Whittaker earlier this year.