MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by rglullis | 2025-06-06 10:52:14+00:00
I'd be more than happy to get the 10€/month I am not giving to YouTube and send it to Jeff if he completely moved out of it.

I know that he is already on Floatplane, but we all know that Google is not working with the best interests of its users/creators in mind, so "criticism" of YouTube while making money there seems hypocritical.
by lelanthran | 2025-06-06 10:56:30+00:00
> We don’t want you burning Korans outside of mosques and we don’t want you throwing paint at people on their way to temple.

Those two things are not the same. The latter is physical assault. The former isn't anything but a statement on faith.

> I’m not religious but I don’t want either of those situations.

I don't see anything wrong in burning a religious book as a public statement. Why, specifically, do you need that banned?
by ab5tract | 2025-06-06 10:57:23+00:00
Yeah, I understand that it might get confusing to use multiple implementations, or to transition between the two, but I seriously doubt these claims that “regular people” (as in, people who are expected to know how to use Word) are struggling with the syntax itself.

The article pretends that Markdown got popular because “it was there”. 15 years ago people were adopting it _because_ it is dead simple, unobtrusive, and visually evocative.

The ones who made it popular, in other words, did so quite intentionally.
by meinersbur | 2025-06-06 10:58:42+00:00
The retractable antenna could only be used for Morse code. Only Harry Manning was well-versed in Morse, so after he quit, neither Earhard nor Fred Noonan effectively couldn't use it anyway [1].

That retractable antenna was for low frequencies. If you are referring to the underside "V" antenna (which was not retractable), that one was likely just damanged, not intentionally removed. [1, 2]

[1] https://youtu.be/zTDFhWWPZ4Q?t=1629 [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39262061
by brailsafe | 2025-06-06 10:59:21+00:00
While that's not how it's ever been used in my life, I can accept that it's perfectly valid for you and presumably many others to feel differently.

Having grown up with so much predominantly east coast originating comedy, and around so many Newfoundland diaspora, I guess it never occurred to me that there was any real negative connotation whatsoever, beyond poking a bit of fun at some of the presumably antiquated cultural stereotypical differences via self-deprecating jokes that most people from smaller places have their own versions of and don't take too seriously.
by saberience | 2025-06-06 10:59:27+00:00
Are you seriously even asking that question?

It’s like having a robot that can give you a hand-job and someone saying, “well it’s a robot…” and you saying “what difference does it make?”

You tell me? What difference does it make talking with an old friend versus an ai simulation of an old friend?

What difference does it make seeing the artist who actually painted something talking about why they painted it, versus get sent an image an ai made in stable diffusion?

The difference is we are human and live in a society with other humans and we make connections with them because of their personalities, experiences, life story, emotions etc.

Perhaps you’re ok with staying alone at home with ai friends and ai generated everything but it seems quite strange to me.
by davedx | 2025-06-06 10:59:28+00:00
Possibly related to that period having two world wars and the Cold War? If I look a lot of the inventions in that timeline, they're related to or directly funded by warfare. Consider radio and radar, rocketry, space flight, the Internet and its related technologies, there's a very big list.

In the US, institutions like DARPA were directly funded for that purpose.
by shakna | 2025-06-06 11:01:21+00:00
For a time, the Cookbook was banned. However, due to most of it being common knowledge, and the rest of it being ineffectual nonsense unlikely to harm anyone, restrictions were relaxed.

In some jurisdictions, however, it does remain banned to this day. YT are liable if they broadcast the contents of the Cookbook to the UK, for example.

Which is a great example of companies acting because they'll end up liable. Which is the only point I've made.
by lompad | 2025-06-06 11:01:39+00:00
This is not correct.

> Any judgment of a court or tribunal and any decision of an administrative authority of a third country requiring a controller or processor to transfer or disclose personal data may only be recognised or enforceable in any manner if based on an international agreement, such as a mutual legal assistance treaty, in force between the requesting third country and the Union or a Member State, without prejudice to other grounds for transfer pursuant to this Chapter.

So if, and only if, an agreement between the US and the EU allows it explicitly, it is legal. Otherwise it is not.
by Defletter | 2025-06-06 11:01:44+00:00
I think the problem comes from an unconscious belief that the Constitution is self-executing, thus is something that can be taken for granted because it'll always be there protecting them. That they can elect someone like Trump and it's fine because he's confined by the Constitution. Ultimately, the Constitution and its amendments are just words on paper: their worth comes from the People's demand, substantiated with an implied threat of revolution, that those words be obeyed. When your society acquiesces to the tyranny of partisanship within your institutions, particularly within the Supreme Court and it's self-proclaimed right to amend the Constitution at will, your Constitution only continues to exist through inertia. Elect someone like Trump who has no regard for the law unless it's useful to him, and that inertia slows. To quote Danielle Allen: "I have seen time and again people who just stop reading at that period after 'pursuit of happiness'." (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AqiFMiQeXNQ)
by GuB-42 | 2025-06-06 11:01:50+00:00
I don't know about the US but in French "droits d'auteur", moral rights are treated differently from exploitation rights. In particular, they cannot be waived, they cannot be sold, and there is no "work-for-hire". For example, even as an employee, every line of code you write will be yours until you die and nothing can change that. You may not be allowed to do anything with it (for example because the exploitation rights go to your employer), but it is still yours.
by lazide | 2025-06-06 11:02:20+00:00
The issue with anti-drone drones is that mid-air interception of a fast moving object by another fast moving object is an incredibly difficult problem from a physics perspectives - especially when one of those objects is actively trying to dodge.

The advantage of course is that the interceptor can position itself arbitrarily, and there doesn’t need to be ongoing line of sight from the initial detection point.

Lasers have the advantage that it’s essentially impossible to dodge a laser beam (speed of light meaning that for objects within the ranges we’re talking about are lazed the moment the laser turns on), so it’s purely an aiming/detection/line of sight issue. But they have the disadvantage that if the drone gets out of the line of sight, it’s completely ineffective.

Well, at least we know what shape the new arms race is taking!
by naikrovek | 2025-06-06 11:03:13+00:00
> My memory feels like a file cabinet without labels, a database without an index, a dictionary of randomly-ordered words without a table of contents. There are many memories there, but most of them can't be retrieved with convenient keywords like "a time when X happened".

Duuuuude that’s how I am. I can’t remember anything autobiographical without some trigger. But once I have the trigger, I remember the event whose memory was triggered. Vividly. But I don’t have the ability to tell you what happened yesterday without a reminder from somewhere. I can’t simply recall stuff a lot of the time. It drives people nuts.
by janjones | 2025-06-06 11:04:45+00:00
> Is #:package <pkg> really so much nicer than #r "nuget: <pkg>" as to deserve deviating from .NET Interactive, F# and the existing NuGet picker? (It could be, if properly argued!)

Yes, we believe so. There is not much to be gained from reusing the syntax (it's not like you can import cs from csx or vice versa). We are also adding other directives, e.g., `#:property` - it would not make sense to reuse `#r` for that. `#r` is short for "reference", because it was originally meant for referencing DLLs which is discouraged in modern .NET. The main motivation for file-based programs is to lower the entry barrier, and having opaquely named directives like `#r` seems counter-productive.

> On that note, is any language other than C# supported for `dotnet run`?

File-based programs are for C# only. F# already has `dotnet fsi`. VB support seems unlikely per the language strategy: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/fundamentals/langua...

> Is the machinery at least documented for other MSBuild SDKs to use?

There is really not much special machinery, an in-memory csproj file is created and built via MSBuild just like an on-disk csproj would. Any MSBuild SDK can be used via the `#:sdk` directive.
by ronakkhunt | 2025-06-06 11:05:16+00:00
While working in Tech industry, I was always spending lot of time looking for a links/urls to various documents, dashboards, repo etc.

I always knew there was a document about that thing (“what”), but I do not know where it was. Lost in an email? slack messages? another document ?

That’s when I came across Go Links at one of my company.

It allowed me to convert some of the long, complicated links to very short, easy-to-remember links.

For example, I can turn this long link

>https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YlD4iif7dodFT_CiRjkaYxqg...

into something like

> go/project

This was mind blowing for me, as when I first came across such set-up. I did not know how it was implemented but something at the network level and it worked only on VPN of the company — but it was very useful

*There was only one challenge*

Sometimes I would even forget this short link, I would remember parts of it, but not the whole link. This happens due to the fact the not all short link will be like “go/project”. In reality it would be bit more complex like

go/team/objectives-2024 go/project-new-ideas

*That’s when I got an Idea*

What if, we make these link searchable? that would be amazing!

So I started working on an idea, I thought there must be many people like me who would want to get better alternative to find their links & tabs they want to open.

More importantly not everyone can do the set-up themselves, they might not all be as technical.

*Birth of the SimpleURL*

So I built a Chrome extension that would allow the same functionality that I needed

- Way for me to create Short Link e.g “go/project” and search them afterward if I forget - No more wasting time to look for links

As I started using the extension, I realised I am being very efficient everywhere and less frustrated

- Find a link in the meeting — go/objectives, go/obj-2025 - Find 1:1 meeting notes just with name of the person —go/ronak, go/john - Personal meeting links — go/talk-to-ronak - Links grouped and organised in the way that my brain remembers e.g. team/objectives, team/roadmap, team/onboarding
by KaiserPro | 2025-06-06 11:07:20+00:00
These are two different, but slightly related topics, which are being conflated with a third.

Google is not censoring based on moral grounds here. Its purely financial. If they are caught hosting "how to circumvent DRM", then a number of licensing agreements they have with major IP owners that allows them to profit off music, video and other IP disappears. Most of the take down stuff is either keyword search or automatic based on who is reporting.

The Online safety act is utterly flawed, to the point that even ofcom really don't know how to implement it. They are reliant on consultants from delloite or whatever, who also have no fucking clue. The guidelines are designed for large players who have a good few million in the bank, because in all reality thats how ofcom are going to take to court.

There are a number of thing the act asks to happen, most of them are common sense, but require named people to implement (ie moderate, provide a way to report posts, allow transparent arbitration, etc, etc) along with defined policies. In the same way that charities are allowed to have a "reasonable" GDPR policy, it seems fair that smaller site should also have that. but this would go down badly with the noise makers.

As for age protection, they also really don't know how to do it practically. This means that instead of providing a private (as in curtains no peaking) age assurance API, they are relying on websites to buy in a commercial service, which will be full of telemetry for advertising snooping.

Then there is moral/editorial censorship, which is what you go to a media platform for. Like it or not, you choose a platform because the stuff you see is what you expect to see there, even if you don't like it. Youtube is totally optimising for views, even if it means longterm decline. (same with facebook, instgram and tiktok)
by lazide | 2025-06-06 11:08:07+00:00
The issue with anti-drone drones is that mid-air interception of a fast moving object by another fast moving object is an incredibly difficult problem from a physics perspectives - especially when one of those objects is actively trying to dodge. If you add in a requirement that the drone must be captured in a non-destructive way, it’s only going to be possible with the lamest consumer drones.

The way air-air missiles typically work is massive fragmentation warheads and proximity detonation. Even then, it doesn’t always work.

The pro however is that the interceptor can position itself somewhat arbitrarily, and there doesn’t need to be ongoing line of sight from the initial detection point. In some cases (theatre radar systems, standoff radar systems), they may not even need to be able to see the target drone until they’re within detonation range. (Think ‘hides behind a random bush until they’re within detonation range of the target drone as it tries to zip by, then explodes with no warning’).

Then of course the attacking drones will add randomness to their attack patterns.

Lasers have the advantage that it’s essentially impossible to dodge a laser beam (speed of light meaning that for objects within the ranges we’re talking about are lazed the moment the laser turns on), so it’s purely an aiming/detection/line of sight issue. But they have the disadvantage that if the drone gets out of the line of sight, it’s completely ineffective. So they’ll need to be placed at locations that overlook large areas and have good visibility towards the entire potential approach area, which makes them vulnerable to artillery, massed attacks, etc.

Well, at least we know what shape the new arms race is taking!
by stuaxo | 2025-06-06 11:08:57+00:00
Having elasticsearch, as this resource hungry slow to update JVM based thing always seems so horrible in Django based projects.

In that world, using haystack and choosing a backend based on C++ is so much less hassle for deployment.

Although for many things just FTS in Postgres is fine too.

I'm sure for planet scale stuff ES is fine, but otherwise I've only found it brings pain in the kind of dev I get to do.
by joker99 | 2025-06-06 11:09:25+00:00
While I understand where you’re coming from, it’s important to mention that the German military buys googles software and hardware to self host an air gapped google cloud. I know that to some it’s a distinction without a difference, but if you want to have a modern(-ish) private cloud _now_, there’s not a lot of non-American competition out there, plus there’s the entire topic of support and consulting services. It would be great if Europe could get its head(s) out its behind and build a competitor (which is not easy, just look at how not great gcp is compared to aws) but they need a solution _now_.

And having worked together with the German government on IT projects, I’ll say that the _only_ way an OSS project would be even considered is if there’s a company backing the project that has extreme amounts of passion, patience and passibility. In the end, they need some _entity_ that is _legally responsible_ - and it’s always better if that entity is not them ;)
by kinow | 2025-06-06 11:09:36+00:00
That's exactly what we are using for our tests in a new pull request to add support to Postgres, https://github.com/BSC-ES/autosubmit/pull/2187

The last GH Actions jobs with SQLite and Python 3.9 took 3m 41s, and the same tests with Postgres took 4m 11s. Running a single test locally in PyCharm also executes in less than 1 second. You notice some bootstrap happening, but once the container image is downloaded locally, it's really quite fast.
by Bengalilol | 2025-06-06 11:09:42+00:00
As sad as it undoubtedly sounds (and as if we're already saying goodbye to the utopia), I think this choice might be wiser than we initially thought. Consider the implications of AI knowing everything about you, even down to your biometric behavior. Think about the threat of disinformation campaigns targeting democracies. I know my stance may seem weak in terms of ideals, and I feel a bitter regret toward my former self. But shouldn’t we, as humans, try to honor our shared values and act accordingly? I am aware that a single hosting company won't do anything regarding those considerations, but ... anyways. I feel sorry for writing those sentences and sharing my doubts.
by verisimi | 2025-06-06 11:09:55+00:00
> children should be protected.

I get how this sounds unambiguously good - but I hate this excuse. As I see it, if you don't allow kids some danger (unmonitored play, freedom of movement) you end up with adults that are completely unable to assess dangers correctly and want themselves (and everyone else) to be nannied by the government/legislation/etc.

There really are dangers out there, and it is not a bad thing to engage with them to be able to build independence, rather than trying to edit the world to conform to a (mistaken, protected) idea of reality.
by LiKao | 2025-06-06 11:10:02+00:00
I would rather dismiss her point on the basis, that from my perspective this may be true for a small niche of academics that focus specifically on programming language formalisms.

When I studied programming language during my university time, this was really focused on formal approaches, so it is true there. But that is how this field of studies defines itself, and that should be considered their right.

Once you look outside of this narrow field, you can easily find a lot of projects and endeavors that cover exactly what she is requesting in that article.

* The rust compiler focuses a lot on more understandable error messages (a topic specifically covered) and even recommendations that make picking up the language easier.

* C++11 standardization also focused a lot on usability and how to improve hard to read error messages.

* Scratch is explicitly designed to look for alternative approaches to programming.

* Programming in other languages has been around for a long time.

In school we were taught a German version of Logo. I don't buy her argument that her language research was dismissed purely because it wasn't hard enough. We simply have anything we need to understand how we could do a programming language in another language. Replace a few lexer definition, and then re-define the whole stdlib in another language. There is simply nothing novel about this. I really hope her research on language covers a lot more than just this.

She also does a very bad bait-and-switch when she suddenly replaces the meaning of the word "hard" in the middle of the article. Initially she clearly used "hard" to refer to difficult, then later she suddenly switches hard in the sense of "hard" sciences, i.e. sciences based on formalisms and empirical research instead of discussions and opinions.

I agree with her a lot of research is missing from non-technical hard sciences (I would consider large parts of psychology a hard science, although it lives at the border of the two worlds). There is some research on the psychology of programming, but this is definitely under-researched. Also usability studies of programming languages are not well established.

In a lot of cases, however, I don't think this is actually something we can really do research on. I have a strong background in psychology, and I don't think we actually could study the impact of different paradigms. If you pick participants that already know programming, they will be highly socialized with the dominant paradigms. If you pick novices you will have to control what they learn over years until they become fluent in the studied paradigm. This isn't feasible and raises sever ethical concerns. Or you don't control it, make short time studies, in which case the results will just not carry any meaning.

Overall for me the article raises some really valid concerns about programming language research and CS in general, but I think she took a really bad turn in describing these as gender based issues. What I would see as the reason for these issues lies in completely different areas and are only very remotely related to gender.
by shakna | 2025-06-06 11:10:43+00:00
Business accounts that list porn sites tend to get banned by the processor. There are very few payment processors willing to work with the major porn networks.

In 2022, both Visa and Mastercard banned Pornhub, leading to major shakeups as the network tried to get off the blacklist.

I don't see most advertisers being happy with spend on such a volatile target - even before the agency debates if it will affect brand image.
by Gareth321 | 2025-06-06 11:11:42+00:00
This is why I have de-Googled my family - at least for the most part. The hardest part was Gmail. Hundreds of services and accounts relied on that email address for 2FA. If I were to be blocked from it, I would be screwed. So I bought a domain and spent the next couple of years migrating everything to it. Pain in the ass, but now no one can ever ban me from my own email address. Worst case scenario my provider blocks me and I switch to another one in minutes. Plus I can do cool things like catch-all, so when I sign up for services I use "verizon@[mydomain.com]". I have caught many cheeky fuckers selling my email address to spammers.

Outside of this there is very little harm in my Google account being banned now. I'd lose some YouTube watch history and a few locations on Google Maps.
by shortsunblack | 2025-06-06 11:11:47+00:00
OpenAI is breaching relevant laws that regulate data protection. Being compelled by a foreign power, for instance, are not grounds for data processing under GDPR.

OpenAI has not started to "be incompliant" with GDPR with this order, yes. More like OpenAI was always incompliant because it does not have relevant controls installed that mitigates extraterritorial tendencies of US law.

Regardless of legality of retention this order brings, them not notifying their users (the court did not compel them to hide this from their users (no gag order is in place) about this material change of data processing, could be constituted as breach of various consumer protection laws, misrepresentation, unfair dealing, false advertising and related.
by christophilus | 2025-06-06 11:11:51+00:00
Same for tobacco stuff. I follow a few pipe-tobacco reviewers, and YT has begun to tighten the clamp there, too.

It wouldn’t bother me if YouTube wasn’t basically a monopoly. I know some of them have been switching to Rumble, but to be honest, the competition is so fragmented that I don’t see any of them gaining critical mass.