MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by ghushn3 | 2025-06-26 04:30:42+00:00
Counter Strike 2 (lol, steam says 2012), DOTA 2 (2013), PUBG (2017), Bongo Cat, Elden Ring: Nightreign (2025), Peak (2025), Rainbow Six Siege (2015), Dune Awakening (2025), Marvel Rivals (2024), aaaaaand Wallpaper Engine.

Now, maybe you cut out Bongo Cat and Wallpaper Engine, those aren't games. Next on the list we'd have Apex Legends (2020) and Warframe (2013).

Few of these games tell you much about performance. And I don't think many of them have ways to get a consistent, quick performance measurement. I think the article authors made a pretty good set of choices, tbh.
by wombatpm | 2025-06-26 04:30:58+00:00
You can build lots of cool stuff. Getting corporate IT to allow api access is like pulling teeth. We have Outlook and Teams, which have APIs that can do things. But no one has the ability to access them. So much for automating your workflows.

Reminds me of Lotus Notes back in the day. It could do anything and had great potential, but there were only 3 developers who had access. In a company of 50k employees.
by seec | 2025-06-26 04:31:10+00:00
Yep, those are the things (among others) I wish I could have on my iPhone. I'll eventually switch but I need to choose a replacement for the Apple Watch and find a way to migrate/convert all the health data.

It feels so bad to have to leave, there are still some nice apps that I really like on iOS and have no true equivalent on Android.
by motorest | 2025-06-26 04:33:00+00:00
> I learnt to program (in a very basic way) before doing the whole paper qualification thing.

This sort of take is disingenuous. No one needs to go to a university to learn the syntax of a programming language, or to build up from a "Hello, world" program. That's not what a university is for.

That's not software engineering either.

In the very least an engineering exposes students to a curriculum which covers the necessary topics which allow someone to be competent at an engineering discipline.

Now, being a salesman and an engineer are two separate skills,so I don't really see a problem in having a "self-taught" programmer pitching a service and a business plan. However, as a prospective customer,having an auth service rolled out by people who clearly are not auth experts... That sounds like multiple downsides bundled with barely no upside.
by lukan | 2025-06-26 04:33:07+00:00
And the area you own is theoretical proportionate to your avaibale money.

So yes, rich people can obviously have more of it all, like with everything else that money can buy. But is this really a point worth going in deeper here?

I see the point as in "solar power plus battery is good", creates resillence, please more of it.

Unfair distribution of wealth is a different problem.

And here concreteley the article lacks for me details, what exactly the work on the grid means, if it is really about fossils vs solar, but microgrids that can connect to each other sounds like a pragmatic solution to me.
by ghushn3 | 2025-06-26 04:34:12+00:00
Gamepass is the only thing holding me on Windows, and in October, Windows 10 hits EoL. I think that puts a pretty clear end date on the end of my Gamepass subscription as I don't want to upgrade to a new Windows version.

If folks can figure out how to run Gamepass on Linux before then, I'll bounce, but I understand it's pretty tightly coupled to the Windows OS.
by jongjong | 2025-06-26 04:35:25+00:00
It's not that regulation makes moral businesses unethical. It prevents businesses (moral or immoral) from entering the market in the first place because complying with regulations is too costly. It creates a moat for incumbents which gives them more leeway to harm the consumer (they don't have to compete on the basis of morality as there aren't enough alternatives for consumers to be picky about such things). Regulations often act as a cover, a substitute for ethical conduct. How many corporate cases never make it to court? End up in corporate-friendly arbitration instead? If any case against them comes to court, they will be sure to bring out their list of ISO certifications as legal cover.
by mapmeld | 2025-06-26 04:35:58+00:00
Before a recent annual performance review, I looked over my stats in the company monolith repo and found out I was net-negative on lines of code. That comes mostly from removing auto-generated API code and types (the company had moved to a new API and one of my projects was removing v1) but it was quite funny to think about going to work every day to erase code.
by cole-k | 2025-06-26 04:36:53+00:00
The constant use of metaphor and simile drove me crazy. I had suspected this might be AI due to the frequency as well as absurdity of some of the comparisons (Talmudic scholars? Renaissance cardinals??) but humans also write dumb things like this that make them feel smart more than they serve rhetorical purpose. Or so I think.

I mean just look at this. I didn't even need to look through more than a few paragraphs to find:

> But the subscription traps are where the real extraction occurs—and here we encounter the kind of business model innovation that would make a mobster tip his hat in professional admiration. Customers complain of being locked into year-long commitments they can't escape, like hotel California but with erectile dysfunction pills. Better Business Bureau complaints reveal the pattern with the reliability of a Swiss timepiece: ... Picture ordering a 3-month hair loss kit only to find Hims has shipped and charged for a fourth without consent, like a pharmaceutical version of that friend who keeps ordering shots when you've already said you're driving.

BTW, where's the referral URL you speak of? I didn't realize there was a smoking gun.
by bastawhiz | 2025-06-26 04:37:47+00:00
> some medical device segfaulting or OOMing in an unmanaged way

Memory safety is arguably always a security issue. But a library segfaulting when NOT dealing with arbitrary external input wouldn't be a CVE in any case, it's just a bug. An external third party would need to be able to push a crafted config to induce a segfault. I'm not sure what kind of medical device, short of a pacemaker that accepts Bluetooth connections, might fall into such a category, but I'd argue that if a crash in your dependencies' code prevents someone's heart from beating properly, relying CVEs to understand the safety of your system is on you.

Should excessive memory allocation in OpenCV for certain visual patterns be a CVE because someone might have built an autonomous vehicle with it that could OOM and (literally) crash? Just because you put the code in the critical path of a sensitive application doesn't mean the code has a vulnerability.

> 'Availability' is a pretty common security concern for maybe 40 years now from an industry view.

Of course! It's a security problem for me in my usage of a library because I made the failure mode of the library have security implications. I don't want my service to go offline, but that doesn't mean I should be entitled to having my application's exposure to failure modes affecting availability be treated on equal footing to memory corruption or an RCE or permissions bypass.
by Lerc | 2025-06-26 04:37:49+00:00
I thought that this could be an opportunity for volunteers who can't dedicate the time to learn a codebase thoroughly enough to be a regular committer. They just have to evaluate a patch to see if it meets a threshold of quality where they can pass it on to someone who does know the codebase well.

The barrier to being able to do a first commit on any project is usually quite high, there are plenty of people who would like to contribute to projects but cannnot dedicate the time n effort to pass that initial threshold. This might allow people an ability to contribute at a lower level while gently introducing them to the codebase where perhaps they might become a regular contributer in the future.
by rashunain | 2025-06-26 04:38:03+00:00
Daily current affairs updates are available in English, including news headlines, GK questions, and answers. Overall, the Current Affairs 26 June 2025 covers a range of topics, including national and international news, sports, education, and daily current affairs quizzes. It is essential to stay updated with the latest news and developments to remain informed and prepared for competitive exams and other challenges.
by linsomniac | 2025-06-26 04:38:35+00:00
>I don't want to review code the author doesn't understand

I get that. But the AI tooling when guided by a competent human can generate some pretty competent code, a lot of it can be driven entirely through natural language instructions. And every few months, the tooling is getting significantly more capable.

I'm contemplating what exactly it means to "understand" the code though. In the case of one project I'm working on, it's an (almost) entirely vibe-coded new storage backend to an existing VM orchestration system. I don't know the existing code base. I don't really have the time to have implemented it by hand (or I would have done it a couple years ago).

But, I've set up a test cluster and am running a variety of testing scenarios on the new storage backend. So I understand it from a high level design, and from the testing of it.

As an open source maintainer myself, I can imagine (thankfully I haven't been hit with it myself) how frustrating getting all sorts of low quality LLM "slop" submissions could be. I also understand that I'm going to have to review the code coming in whether or not the author of the submission understands it.

So how, as developers, do we leverage these tools as appropriate, and signal to other developers the level of quality in code. As someone who spent months tracking down subtle bugs in early Linux ZFS ports, I deeply understand that significant testing can trump human authorship and review of every line of code. ;-)
by deathanatos | 2025-06-26 04:39:12+00:00
> The genius of Hims lies in understanding that consumers will pay almost any premium to avoid the humiliation of discussing erectile dysfunction or hair loss with an actual human being.

Maybe.

> Finasteride for hair loss runs about $10-15 per month as a generic,

I wish. Generic finasteride costs ~$70+t¹/3mo but only from a PBM, and $80/mo from a pharmacy, and is utterly uncovered by insurance.

Or maybe, it is that this is what American Rx healthcare looks like: https://imgur.com/a/awRSOsA ²

> and can cost as little as $2 per month with a GoodRx coupon.

And how does GoodRx somehow magically make drugs cheaper?

> On February 25, 2020, Consumer Reports published an article stating that GoodRx shared user data—specifically, pseudonymized advertising ID numbers that companies use to track the behavior of web users across websites, the names of the drugs that users browsed, and the pharmacies where user sought to fill prescriptions—with Google, Facebook, and around twenty other internet-based companies.

> On February 1, 2023, the Federal Trade Commission fined GoodRx US$1.5 million for violations of the Breach Notification Rule and the Federal Trade Commission Act for allegedly failing to obtain specific, informed, and unambiguous consent from users before disclosing health-related information to Facebook and Google.

(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GoodRx#Controversy)

Last time I was offered a GoodRx coupon (well past those dates) it came with no informed consent of any kind, being merely presented as "magic coupon make drug cheaper" which triggered my "that's too good to be true" alarm. AFAICT, selling your information is the company's business plan.

¹Cigna is utterly incompetent, and while the discount of playing their game is sizable, it costs a great deal of time. It took, I think, 4? 5? calls to customer support to set up a prescription?

²No, proceeding to checkout does not get you the price. You don't get to know the price until after you've placed the order. I have to go on past experience, and prayers.
by fsckboy | 2025-06-26 04:41:45+00:00
>Yes, I agree FORTH should be probably be on the list, at least if the list was a few languages longer, for as influential as it's been.

Forth has not been influential, at all. If it was your first or second encounter with computers, it might have been influential on you, which is a great thing for you, but it was not influential on the industry.

the late 70's-early 80's was the beginning of the microprocessor era. This opened the door to computers for people who would be interested in computers but had no access prior. But the "leading" people in computer science at that time were the people who did already have access to computers. This created a bifurcation between the people who were, say, pursuing lisp since 1960 because of what they had learned about lambda calculus before, and people pursuing Forth who had never heard of Lisp, but had heard of Pascal but didn't realize that UCSD Pascal was a p-code stack machine just like Forth was; if they had realized it there might have been overlap, there wasn't. Programmable HP calculators were already more advanced since the HP-65

(please don't nitpick me, if you remember that time, you know what i'm talking about.) The much revered Dr Dobbs and Byte magazine were not on the reading list of people who were at MIT or Carnegie or Stanford. If you graduated at that time (hint hint) you had this choice of working at a place like Microsoft (DOShit in the boonies) or Apple (8-bit 6502 nonsense on an OS nobody remembers) or at DEC or HP or Xerox or BBN, companies pursuing excellence based on the already-history of CS.

because microprocessor "ate the world", the early history of microprocessors seems "important": it wasn't, except for what it became

when Apple and Microsoft borrowed ideas from Xerox PARC to create MacOs and Microsoft Windows, they were borrowing from programmable microcode architectures which are still more interesting than amd64
by rendaw | 2025-06-26 04:42:13+00:00
Actual link https://www.dieuxskin.com/pages/sunscreen-ingredient-checker

> Using FDA and European sunscreen databases as the backbone

> This tool is made and maintained by humans, not AI (a reminder, AI has hallucinations)

I hate sunscreen (hard to apply properly, then I want to wash it off as soon as I'm back inside since it's a bunch of unknown chemicals and it's generally easier to just avoid going out at noon) but some visibility into various brands could be good to move past that.
by Tadpole9181 | 2025-06-26 04:42:15+00:00
> Hair loss is sucky, sure, but in the grand scheme of medicine it's nothing.

It's also pretty trivial to prevent or recover at onset. Finasteride and minoxadil are FDA approved on-label prescriptions for it (well, the later is OTC).

Dermatologists will happily write the prescription and check in with you as often as you want to schedule.
by DoingSomeThings | 2025-06-26 04:43:11+00:00
This is a frustrating article. To pick one example:

"The most damning aspect is not their exploitation of loopholes or their willingness to combine dangerous drug cocktails or even their reliance on unvetted Chinese suppliers..."

"unvetted" is doing a lot of work here. There's no evidence provided for this claim of working with shady sources and doing no diligence on the products they are selling. I know that to be false from first-hand connections in the telehealth space.

Hims works with 503B pharmacies. They are FDA inspected. They run batch testing on their source material and require strict compliance. All safe, legal, vetted pathways.

It's bizarre to me that the author is linking Novo Nordisk newswire press releases as sources of truth but is unwilling to to do basic research on how Hims operates. NN is hardly a faultless player here. They're selling this medicine for $1k+ per month!

Separately -- Algorithmic care is fine because most decisions are algorithmic. It's no different than what you receive from the 5-minute dr visit in person.

In a perfect world we'd have primary care doctors to coordinate care, direct you to the perfect pharmacy for each medicine you need, etc. In our real world, convenience and access are a good things. The shift from "patient" to DTC "client" is a net win for the public.
by comex | 2025-06-26 04:43:21+00:00
This is a tangent from your main argument about DoS.

But when you talk about URL parsing in a linter or a regexp in logging code, I think you're implying that the bugs are unimportant, in part, because the code only handles trusted input.

Which is valid enough. The less likely some component is to receive untrusted input, the lower the severity should be.

But beware of going all the way and saying "it's not a bug because we assume trusted input". Whenever you do that, you're also passing down a responsibility to the user: the responsibility to segregate trusted and untrusted data!

Countless exploits have arisen when some parser never designed for untrusted input ended up being exposed to it. Perhaps that's not the parser's fault. But it always happens.

If you want to build secure systems, the only good approach is to stop using libraries that have those kinds of footguns.
by lisa0612 | 2025-06-26 04:44:45+00:00
【One-line product intro】 ReelRapid turns plain text into vertical Shorts—no face required. Paste a script, hit “Generate,” and get a ready-to-post video with footage, captions, and voice-over.

【Why we built ReelRapid】 We wanted creators to spin up channels and test ideas fast, not drown in editing.

• Batch output – Drop a stack of scripts, get a stack of videos back in minutes. • Faster workflow – AI handles cutting, stock footage, captions; you focus on ideas. • Zero learning curve – Works even if you’ve never touched Premiere or After Effects. • Low-cost testing – Validate topics for pennies; polish later once a hit is found.
by linsomniac | 2025-06-26 04:47:05+00:00
>So-called AI makes this worse.

The AI tooling is also really, really good at being able to piece together the code, the contextual domain, the documentation, the tests, the related issues/tickets, it could even take the change history into account, and be able to help refresh your memory of unfamiliar code in the context of bugs or new changes you are looking at making.

Whether or not you go to the gym, you are probably going to want to use an excavator if you are going to dig a basement.
by zer00eyz | 2025-06-26 04:47:22+00:00
https://www.wired.com/story/ai-art-copyright-matthew-allen/

https://www.cnbc.com/2025/03/19/ai-art-cannot-be-copyrighted...

Here are cases where the product of AI/ML are not the products of people and not capable of being copyrighted. These are about the OUTPUT being unable to be copyrighted.
by tho23i4234324 | 2025-06-26 04:48:37+00:00
I'd doubt this very much - LLMs hallucinate API calls and commit all sorts of subtle errors that you need to catch (esp. if you're on proprietary problems which it's not trained on).

It's a good replacement for Google, but probably nothing close to what it's being hyped out to be by the capital allocators.
by lynx97 | 2025-06-26 04:49:11+00:00
> it'd be safer to never ride the motorcycle

First and foremost, it would be less noisy! What MC riders tend to conveniently forget is that they are putting the burden of having to deal with the noise they produce on everyone around them. Yes, your safety is also important (for you), but the noise you're producing is an issue for everyone around you.
by throw234234234 | 2025-06-26 04:49:22+00:00
I did say "not all software is like this, but many domains are". So I agree with you.

Also note unlike say for physical domains where it's expensive to "tear down" until you commit and deploy (i.e. while the code is being worked on) you can try/iterate/refine via your IDE, shell, whatever. Its just text files after all; in the end you are accountable for the final verification step before it is published. I never said we don't need a verification step; or a gate before it goes to production systems. I'm saying its easier to throw away "hallucinations" that don't work and you can work around gaps in the model with iterations/retries/multiple versions until the user is happy with it.

Conversely I couldn't have an AI build a house, I don't like it, it demolishes it and builds a slightly different one, etc etc until I say "I'm happy with this product, please proceed". The sheer amount of resource waste and time spent in doing so would be enormous. I can simulate, generate plans, etc maybe with AI but nothing beats seeing the "physical thing" for some products especially when there isn't the budget/resources to "retry/change".

TL;DR the greater the cost of iteration/failure; the less likely you can use iteration to cover up gaps in your statistical model (i.e. tail risks are more likely to bite/harder to mitigate).
by ProllyInfamous | 2025-06-26 04:49:51+00:00
I am a blue collar electrician. Not a coder (but definitely geeky).

Whisper works quite well on Apple Silicon with simple drag/drop install (i.e. no terminal commands). Program is free; you can get an M4 mini for ~$550; don't see how an online platform can even compete with this, except for one-off customers (i.e. not great repeat customers).

We used it to transcribe ddaayyss of audio microcassettes which my mother had made during her lifetime. Whisper.app even transcribed a few hours that are difficult to comprehend as a human listener. It is VERY fast.

I've used the text to search for timestamps worth listening to, skipping most dead-space (e.g. she made most while driving, in a stream of not-always-focused consciousness).
by Nevermark | 2025-06-26 04:50:18+00:00
That isn't true.

Look at the pictures. It has the same outer shape, that is all that is required for the geometry.

And for center of mass, you set the positions for the bars, any variations in their thickness, then size and place the flat facet, in order to achieve the same center of mass as for a filled uniform density object of the same geometry.

As the article says:

> carefully calibrated center of mass

Unless an object has internal interactions, for purposes of center of mass you can achieve the uniform-density-equivalent any way you want. It won't change the behavior.
by markstock | 2025-06-26 04:51:24+00:00
Um, no?

This is a fine collection of links - much to learn! - but the connection between flow and gravitation is (in my understanding) limited to both being Green's function solutions of a Poisson problem. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green%27s_function

There are n-body methods for both (gravitation and Lagrangian vortex particle methods), and I find the similarities and differences of those algorithms quite interesting.

But the Fedi paper misses that key connection: they're simply describing a source/sink in potential flow, not some newly discovered link.
by safety1st | 2025-06-26 04:52:57+00:00
Well, now I'm a mixture of disappointed and confused

I was wondering what Gemini Advanced is. I don't see any mention of a Gemini Advanced here, but there is a Gemini Pro and a Gemini Ultra: https://gemini.google/subscriptions/

I had gotten the impression that Workspace might entitle us to some API credits or something based on section 3A here where they describe how to authenticate with the API via your Workspace account https://github.com/google-gemini/gemini-cli/blob/main/docs/c... . That document does explicitly mention "Gemini Code Assist for Workspace" but I think I saw another website from Google agreeing with you and saying you can't use it with a Workspace account currently.

Yeah, this is all a mess. Time to go back to bed for six months and just continue using whatever my corporate overlords have already handed to me
by lukan | 2025-06-26 04:54:48+00:00
"We can't fix a lot of the problems facing our society and our planet with "only wealthy can afford this" solutions"

And I think, we can't fix a lot of technical problems if we make everything about money distribution.

Besides, solar plus battery became really cheap. And get cheaper every day.

And this work to connect such microgrids is potentially beneficial for poor areas all around the world.

But no, it doesn't solve the issue of extreme poverty, but why would it?