MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by jonathan_edge | 2025-06-09 21:45:23+00:00
Xbox Gamertag Generator is a smart gamertag generator that helps gamers create unique, available usernames for online gaming platforms.

Moving beyond simple word mashups, our tool uses customizable style filters to produce memorable and fitting names that aren't already in use. We eliminate the frustration of finding a new online identity by offering a streamlined, zero-friction solution for players on Xbox, PlayStation, PC or any gaming profile.

Our goal is to make creating a personal brand in the gaming world instant and inspiring.
by cryptonector | 2025-06-09 21:46:08+00:00
> 2025-05-15 - Panel awards $1,337 + swag. Rationale: Exploitation likelihood is low. (lol)

Yeah, no, the exploitation likelihood of this is very high. The number of users who might have their phone numbers revealed might be low, but I guarantee you that private investigators, detectives, criminals, etc. would all use this if they needed it and it was there.
by jwarden | 2025-06-09 21:46:20+00:00
Yes, as you (sarcastically) imply people do indeed try to use QF to make actual decisions, not recognizing the proofs are based on assumptions that don't match reality.

There's nothing wrong with making proofs based on simplifying assumptions. A lot of incremental progress is made that way. The problem is not the QF theory, it is that people are using QF in the real world because they think it has all these great theoretical properties in the real world -- not recognizing that the underlying assumptions are unrealistic.
by gmueckl | 2025-06-09 21:46:31+00:00
I think that the batching that I have in mind would work especially well with complex layouts. The thing to realize is that even if you have tons of elements on a screen, their visual components aren't actually stacked deeply in most cases and the type and order of applied effects is quite similar for large groups of elements. This allows for pretty effective per-level batching in hierarchies, even if elements don't have the same parents.
by ryandrake | 2025-06-09 21:46:37+00:00
> "When I load the program, I get an error"

You're lucky if they even say that. Many public bug trackers I've seen are just filled with spam, entitlement and anger, demands/threats, or incoherent fever dreams of very unwell people. Forget about getting logs or reproduction steps. When you open bug tracking up to the public, you're lucky if what you get back is even remotely serious.
by tomschwiha | 2025-06-09 21:46:39+00:00
I'm not sure if I can follow your argument. A software dev usually works on something that is actually sellable (the spreadsheet software itself or a SaaS platform). If we take Facebook the platform as an example, for sure you could sell the software. Or a startup like Windsurf that gets bought because of the software they developed. So from my perspective devs actually create assets.

If there should be tax discounts to make it attractive to develop software is the political decision.
by ranger_danger | 2025-06-09 21:46:47+00:00
I think their point is that there was never any reason to even know what people identify as, or your political views, and that there still shouldn't be. That things like "diversity" in online-only circles doesn't really make sense. I don't want to know your sexual preferences or your gender identity, not that I am against anything, just that it's completely irrelevant to writing code and learning about technology etc. and only seems to lead to more drama by including it at all.

As a more personal example, I no longer support the Linux kernel because I no longer consider it fully "open" to contributions, especially when accepting those contributions are no longer based solely on technical merit, but are also actively rejected for political reasons, even for patches that are merely fixes, which benefits everyone, and not just a sanctioned country. Even going so far as removing names from the maintainers list because of some unspoken combination of their country of origin, employer or political affiliation. Not only the lack of advance notice, transparency and empathy, but the abusive attitude Linus continues to display to the world about this and many other issues.
by chermi | 2025-06-09 21:47:23+00:00
You're right. I was focused on the idea that for software to be taxed as a capital investment there had to be a time when it was considered a finished product. Like building a tractor. I guess the analogy then is how the tractor builder is taxed when fulfilling warranties. I suppose tractor business can expense as R&D work that goes into processes that make it easier to fulfill warranties.
by tmnvdb | 2025-06-09 21:47:32+00:00
You've misunderstood: cycle time is neither a forecast nor a measure of individual productivity.

Cycle time measures how long it takes for a unit of work (usually a ticket) to move from initiation to completion within a team's workflow. It is a property of the team / process, not individuals. It can be used to generate statistical forecasts for when a number of tasks are likely to be completed by the team process.

For most teams, actual programming or development tasks usually represent only a small portion—often less than 20%—of the total cycle time. The bulk of cycle time typically results from process inefficiencies like waiting periods, bottlenecks, handoffs between team members, external dependencies (such as waiting for stakeholder approval or code review), and other friction points within the workflow. Because of this, many Kanban-based forecasting methods don't even attempt to estimate technical complexity. They focus instead on historical cycle time data.

For example, consider a development task estimated to take a developer only two days of actual programming. If the developer has to wait on code reviews, deal with shifting priorities, or coordinate with external teams, the total cycle time from task initiation to completion might end up taking two weeks. Here, focusing on the individual’s performance misses the bigger issue: the structural inefficiencies embedded within the workflow itself.

Even if tasks were perfectly and uniformly distributed across all developers—a scenario both unlikely and probably undesirable—this fact would remain. The purpose of measuring cycle time is to identify and address overall process problems, not to evaluate individual contributions.

If you're using cycle time as an individual performance metric, you're missing the fundamental point of what cycle time actually measures.
by FullyFunctional | 2025-06-09 21:47:39+00:00
I vaguely remember the NEWS workstation at the time, but it was seen as weirdly different and it wasn’t that cheap compared to the competition. Also, loads of companies came out with diskless terminals — is there any evidence that Sony was a frontrunner here?

It is fun to contemplate the alternative universe in which Sony stayed in the workstation market, but I think Sony was more like DEC than Sun, and it would have ended the same way for all.
by moritzwarhier | 2025-06-09 21:48:29+00:00
> the debate about types, TypeScript, and web development is, for example, largely anecdotal gossip not backed by much in terms of structured research

I'd be interested in the type of structured research the author is interested in. Could it also be researched whether Go or PHP is better for web development? In some sense, I guess. Both are probably more efficient than writing Apache extensions in assembler, but who knows?
by linguae | 2025-06-09 21:48:52+00:00
I had no idea Steve Jobs felt that way about Larry Tesler. There were so many great UI experts at Apple, like Larry Tesler, Bruce Tognazzini, and Don Norman. While I love Mac OS X for its stability and its Unix support, I prefer the interface of the classic Mac OS, and it seemed to me that many third-party applications of the era were even more compliant with Apple’s human interface guidelines compared to later eras.

A dream desktop OS for me would be something with a classic Mac interface and with conformity to the Apple human interface guidelines of the 1990s, but with Lisp- or Smalltalk-like underpinnings to support component-based software. It would be the ultimate alternate universe Mac OS, the marriage of Smalltalk (with Lisp machine influence) with Macintosh innovations. Of course, there were many projects at Apple during the 80s and 90s that could’ve led to such a system.

Now that I’m a community college professor, I have more free time in the summer months for side projects...
by like_any_other | 2025-06-09 21:49:10+00:00
That doesn't answer my question, which was about Americans.

> grasping at straws

So stay at home orders and gathering bans [1] aren't authoritarian? Note, I am not asking if they were justified, or necessary (or perceived as such, given the information known at the time), but if they were authoritarian.

If someone argues a point poorly, that doesn't make the point itself invalid.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._state_and_local_governmen...
by TacticalCoder | 2025-06-09 21:49:10+00:00
> I'm excited to run Systemd on mac!

OCI containers are supposed to be "one container, one PID": at the very least the container's server is PID1 (at times other processes may be spawned but typically the container's main process is going to be PID1).

Containerization is literally the antithesis of systemd.

So I don't understand your comment.
by consumer451 | 2025-06-09 21:49:22+00:00
I would really like to thank you for posting this comment.

I shared the study with my stepfather, who is suffering from Leukemia, and is also taking a ridiculous number of various unregulated supplements.

All of us in the family, and his top 1% doctors, have been trying to get him off of most them. It's been a losing battle so far.

I shared the link that you posted, and it may have finally done the job.
by FireSquid2006 | 2025-06-09 21:49:27+00:00
Copied from the study

"To determine whether the measured effects were actually due to receiving the basic income and not, for example, to broader societal developments, the Basic Income Pilot Project was designed as a randomised controlled trial. This ensured that the participants in the control group were so-called 'statistical twins' of the basic income group. This meant that they were very similar in their sociodemographic characteristics and differed mainly in whether or not they had received a basic income.

Both groups were essential to the success of the study. Only by comparing their experiences could scientific conclusions be drawn.

To prevent bias, care was also taken to ensure that both groups included equal numbers of ideological supporters and opponents of basic income.

The study focused on people between the ages of 21 and 40 living alone in a household with a net income of between €1,100 and €2,600 per month. We explain why these characteristics were chosen in our journal."
by robocat | 2025-06-09 21:49:39+00:00
> I think Zuck, the PayPal Mafia, and the blood-boy cabal bribed some Congresscritters to kill off what remained of their competition.

What's with the craze for finding conspirational incentives?

There's a repeatable pattern where commenters hallucinate an unreasonable incentive for everything.

Motivations are difficult to discern (see courtrooms), and it is a modern vice to try and analyse incentives, but too often the cause-and-effect imaginations are not even reasonable guesses, but are just pure fiction.

My best guess (based off word choices made) is that we all love to create new stories/narratives, that fit into our personal tribal stories.
by theonething | 2025-06-09 21:50:08+00:00
You seem to be wrongly implying that I'm insinuating that loving dogs is correlated with being a ruthless killer.

My comment was another counter example to the GP's statement: "if you can be loving and empathetic to a dog, you can surely began to be that way to humans."

So the point is loving dogs doesn't necessarily correlate with being loving towards humans. That doesn't say anything about what loving dogs does correlate with.

That's very different from what you seem to be implying.
by ethbr1 | 2025-06-09 21:50:15+00:00
The benefit of skeuomorphism was that it was universal.

Everyone decided that "save" = "disk"

Maybe a different looking disk, but still a disk.

That universality across apps for basic functionality was the biggest feature: it didn't matter if I knew what a disk was or not, because I knew the disk-shaped thing meant save in every app.

The original modern sin of UX was having the hubris to ditch universality because they believed whatever batshit they dreamed up was better enough to justify doing so.

It wasn't. Arguably, it couldn't ever be.

You could come up with a unique wiz-bang UX for something that's objectively 25% better than skeuomorphism, and it still wouldn't be a net improvement. Because no user cares about one specific app enough to train on it.

But building a hammer that looks like every other hammer doesn't get you on the cover of design/UX magazines...
by ykthinker | 2025-06-09 21:50:32+00:00
We just launched Arrival Go, a location-sharing app designed with privacy and flexibility in mind. Unlike always-on trackers, it supports both real-time sharing and temporary, event-based coordination. You can create standard groups for meetups or trusted circles for continuous updates, and control exactly when you're visible.

Built for cross-platform users, Arrival Go avoids the walled-garden limitations of Apple and Google’s location tools. Would love feedback, questions, or thoughts from the HN community!
by itishappy | 2025-06-09 21:51:06+00:00
> Unlike traditional pulsars, which are produced by neutron stars and spit out radio signals every few seconds or milliseconds, LPTs emit pulses at intervals of minutes or hours apart — a period previously thought to be impossible.

Pulsar's pulse comes from their spin contorting the magnetic field lines. When they slow down, they lose energy, and at some point they don't have enough to create XRays.
by Atreiden | 2025-06-09 21:52:36+00:00
So this is a huge problem, and one worth tackling, but I worry very much about the timing of this post in the context of the bill being brought before the Senate now.

We should not implement horrific legislation just because we agree with a single provision. Calling your representatives is the right path, but you MUST be explicit that you do not support the current bill being brought forth that addresses this.

Here are a few pieces for context, if you're not informed about what's in this bill: https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/5339440-the-big-beautifu... https://archive.is/No4o9

Please, I beseech my fellow Americans, do not vocalize any support for this bill. We'll correct the ills of the 2017 administration in time, but this is not the way to do that.
by diskzero | 2025-06-09 21:52:45+00:00
Marking Menus [1], Pie Menus, Radial Menus and friends have been around for a while. There is good body of research on them, with some recent research done on their use in multi-touch environments. [2]

While working at DreamWorks, I would often watch artists navigate complex marking menu hierarchies and invoke a command before the menu items themselves could actually be read by a non-trained user. In our custom lighting tool, you could execute the marking menu command by invoking the menu command and making them mouse movement before the menu actually drew.

1. https://www.billbuxton.com/MMUserLearn.html 2. https://damassets.autodesk.net/content/dam/autodesk/research...
by bsder | 2025-06-09 21:53:20+00:00
They also broke XWayland via a Mutter change that clearly wasn't tested at all given how quickly the bug reports started pouring in.

https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/mutter/-/issues/4133

So, they don't want you to use X11 AND they don't want to support XWayland properly, either.

None of this will get solved until some programmer does something similar to what the Pipewire guy did and rips the whole system down. In this case, probably starting from the assumption of "Vulkan is the base" and building up from there.
by ksec | 2025-06-09 21:53:48+00:00
Cant believe Tim Cook is about to be CEO longer than Steve Jobs. Thank You for that perspective.

On the other hand Steve Jobs has accomplished far more within the same time frame compared to Tim Cook with far fewer resources. I really like the analogy of "autopilot".

I do think Steve could push Forstall as his successor, but didn't because Forstall wasn't ready as CEO. Tim Cook was a much better choice at the time as they have to compete with Android and they need market share ( in terms of user not sales ) to not repeat the same mistake with Mac vs PC. Tim should have mediate between Forstall and Ive instead of picking sides. The restructuring created power vacuum for Craig and Eddy Cue to pick up. With Crag we end up with OS that is constantly resume / features release driven and Eddy Cue which we end up with Apple Music, Apple TV+, Apple Fitness, Apple Arcade. None of them in my opinion are good decisions or great products / services.
by herobird | 2025-06-09 21:54:13+00:00
I don't know how fuel metering in Wasmtime works and what its overhead is but keep in mind that Wasmi is an interpreter based Wasm runtime whereas Wasmtime generates machine code (JIT).

In past experiments I remember that fuel metering adds roughly 5-10% overhead to Wasmi executions. The trick is to not bump or decrease a counter for every single executed instruction but instead to group instructions together in so-called basic blocks and bump a counter for the whole group of instructions.

This is also the approach that is implemented by certain Wasm tools to add fuel metering to an existing Wasm binary.
by hollerith | 2025-06-09 21:54:18+00:00
It's not that dire: it is possible that some bright young person appears tomorrow with a good method for creating an AI such that it will stay aligned even if it become massively superhuman in its capabilities. If that happens, then Eliezer and Nate will withdraw their objection to going ahead with frontier AI research -- provided of course that they can understand the bright young person's explanation for why the method will work.

That is unlikely though: we will probably have to wait decades before anyone devises such a method and such an explanation. Eliezer and Nate recommend research into human cognitive enhancement to make the wait shorter.

Note that the approach used in all the frontier AIs of the last 13 years (namely, deep learning) might prove too difficult to align with the result that the bright young person (more realistically, a series of bright young people building on each other's breakthroughs) must come up with an alternative approach to generating the AI's cognitive capabilities.
by whynotminot | 2025-06-09 21:54:36+00:00
I don’t think your overall take is wrong (it’s about money), but maybe the simplicity of it is.

Reality is that designers, product managers, engineers — they all wanna build cool things, get promoted, make money etc.

You don’t do that by shipping plain designs, no matter how tried and true. The pressure to create something new and interesting is ever present. And look we have these powerful Apple silicon chips that can capably render these neat effects.

So no I don’t think it’s a shadowy conspiracy to come after your iPhone 8. Just the regular pressure of everyday men and women to build new and interesting things that will bring success.
by Vilian | 2025-06-09 21:55:12+00:00
Relevant xkcd https://xkcd.com/2501

It's weird seeing people without computer familiarity using one, it feels like they are blind, they click in a button with a label and a icon, and when you ask todo it again they can't find it(even when you literally tell them the button name), it feels like their vision FOV is limited to a few centimeters, like those horror games flashlight lol, it's my own experience, but yeah, they aren't going to remember the error, or don't even read it, imagine print screen it before clicking "ok"
by fsckboy | 2025-06-09 21:55:17+00:00
the reason property plant and equipment is amortized over time instead of expensed right away is to match up the tax deduction with the profit. If building a factory and filling it with robots will produce cars over a 10 year period in the future, it makes sense to subtract those costs over the same 10 year period. Matching profits with expenses is essentially why accounting was invented in the first place, so financial statements would show smoother and continuous operation of a smooth and continuous company, instead of big peaks and valleys as if something had happened.

With software companies, developing software (like Microsoft Windows) allows you to profit from that software over the next 5 years. Matching profits with expenses makes rational sense.

Frequenty, politicians use the tax code to implement popular social policy. This way they can reward things and groups they want to, and still be able to say "we aren't giving subsidies, we aren't giving people cash, we are simply giving tax deductions and tax credits" These sorts of programs are, across the board, more distorting of the economy and make the tax code incomprehensibly more complex. But matching expenses against profits? makes perfect sense.
by jonathanstrange | 2025-06-09 21:55:23+00:00
IANAL but the difference seems to be gigantic. If the secret key is stored on a company server, then that company can be subpoenaed for it. If it's not on the company's server, the client's endpoint has to be compromised (e.g. by a police raid or by electronic surveillance). The former is much easier than the latter. I don't think government authorities can force companies to actively eavesdrop on their clients by pushing malware through their update mechanism to a client's device, at least not officially in non-authoritarian countries with due process.
by hn_acc1 | 2025-06-09 21:55:37+00:00
Maybe when churches start obeying the "no pushing any political candidate" laws and stop pushing things like "all scientists are evil", it would be a more acceptable position for those outside the church? Seriously - I've seen (not joking) statements like: all scientists know god exists, but deny it because they don't want to follow the laws of the bible. This was before I deconverted.
by perrygeo | 2025-06-09 21:55:53+00:00
Given how long it's been around, the promising results, and how many people have been using it for "biohacking" for decades, it was at first a little surprising to hear how little double-blind clinical research exists. Then you realize: methylene blue can't be patented and it's manufacture is no secret. So no one is going to make big money from it, therefore no money goes into clinical research. All too familiar story, and it really calls into question the whole "clinical trials are the arbiter of truth" mentality if the one making that claim also controls the purse strings!
by freeAgent | 2025-06-09 21:56:35+00:00
I don't understand why this article is written as though amortization of R&D spending's costs is the same as completely eliminating their tax benefit. It seems that this essentially causes a large spike in tax revenue in year 0, which will revert to the mean in years 5-15. Companies now amortizing R&D essentially just have to build up those years of R&D spending backlog. Once they have reached their amortization threshold, they're essentially receiving the same tax break they had before.

Right?
by ethbr1 | 2025-06-09 21:57:00+00:00
The entire press release made my brain hurt.

>> Meticulously crafted by rethinking the fundamental elements that make up our software, the new design features an entirely new material called Liquid Glass. It combines the optical qualities of glass with a fluidity only Apple can achieve, as it transforms depending on your content or context.

What the fuck does that even mean?

Feature litmus test: if you can't describe why it's better in plain English... it's probably not better.