MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by ksec | 2025-06-09 21:26:11+00:00
Out of all the listed features, I thought the most important one was "Website Compatibility". After 5 years since they picked up the pace of development Safari is still behind Firefox and Chrome.

And every single release is a long list of fix but every now and then it is still safari the runs into issues. Hopefully "Website Compatibility" will leverage a lot of users on Mac platform to push webkit forward.

Another disappointing thing is again not much mention on new Safari, non-webkit related features. Safari is the most memory inefficient browser out of the three. Especially in multi tab usage with no Tab Sleep / unload feature by default on macOS. Show Tab Overview still loads all Tabs with swap to kill your SSD. No List of Tabs view which is available on both Firefox and Chrome.
by highwaylights | 2025-06-09 21:26:43+00:00
Ironic that it's the 20th anniversary of this other design masterpiece:

https://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Scree...

I don't know that a redesign was called for at all. I guess they needed to show something if Siri still isn't ready, but this is just not it.

I'd have personally hoped for them to beef up iCloud+ but I know it doesn't sell devices to the general user.
by jongjong | 2025-06-09 21:27:28+00:00
QF is an awful idea. Literally every assumption it relies on is wrong... And probably it exacerbates the situation as implementing QF likely causes further degradation of the underlying assumptions... By Goodhart's law "When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure."

It's incredible how, whenever people try to come up with some centralized framework, ideology or plan to improve things, they make things worse and the cost falls on someone else's shoulders.

I've been feeling the effects of this deeply flawed philosophy in my life literally every day yet I had no say on it.
by 9d | 2025-06-09 21:28:47+00:00
I had no idea what fuel is until this discussion.

What's the rationale? Just preventing infinite loops from hanging the host?

If the inefficiency is the counter, what if you just calculated an instruction offset - start < threshold every once in a while?

This probably makes no sense, ignore it, I'm way in over my head.

[1] https://github.com/bytecodealliance/wasmtime/issues/4109

[2] https://github.com/bytecodealliance/wasmtime/blob/main/examp...
by abelanger | 2025-06-09 21:29:29+00:00
For an agent that executes locally, or an agent that doesn't execute very often, I'd agree it's arbitrary.

But programming languages make tradeoffs on those very paths (particularly spawning child processes and communicating with them, how underlying memory is accessed and modified, garbage collection).

Agents often involve a specific architecture that's useful for a language with powerful concurrency features. These features differentiate the language as you hit scale.

Not every language is equally suited to every task.
by cadamsdotcom | 2025-06-09 21:30:07+00:00
While your response is valid, the specific circumstances warrant closer consideration and potentially reconsideration.

One problem with the change being appealed is software engineers have become more expensive to carry and that has contributed to layoffs. Unfortunately there appears no logical reason software activities are taxed differently than other things you might hire a skilled worker for. When one goes looking for a logical and direct motivation for the change it’s tough to find. This special tax treatment is a one-off, and engineers earn high salaries - so is it possible this change was to fund some other tax cut? The optics aren’t good, at least.

Finally and more importantly, this change impacts risky ventures & startups most of all since larger tax bills may be incurred even on failed ventures. When you look where economic growth is coming from, the lion’s share is in tech. Higher costs and layoffs discourage experimentation and discourage the development of a broad range of capability in an organization by way of carrying large teams of engineers. It thus jeopardizes the current most promising sector in the US economy. Yes, tech is also having an “are we the baddies” moment - but layoffs and higher costs for startups are a separate issue that dominates here.

If you want even further proof just look at how this is activating the HN community. Comments are through the roof. This issue warrants more than a default response.
by PaulDavisThe1st | 2025-06-09 21:30:28+00:00
> Think a factory or a mine. That may last for 20 years, but require workers to operate, maintain, etc.

Before Sec 174, s/w development costs were subject to a choice: amortization as if they were a capital expense, or regular deduction as a normal operating expense. Companies could decide which category to put costs into depending on the nature of the work (and presumably to suit their own interests).

Sec 174 removes that option. Or rather, it narrows it significantly. You must be absolutely confident that you paid developer X for ONLY maintainance work before deducting their salary.
by PhilipRoman | 2025-06-09 21:30:37+00:00
They're not really a moving target (since some distros ship ancient kernels, most components will handle lack of new syscalls gracefully), but the surface is still pretty big. A single ioctl() or write() syscall could do a billion different things and a lot of software depends on small bits of this functionality, meaning you gotta implement 99% of it to get everything working.
Show HN: Marmot – Simple data catalog with powerful search and lineage
by charlie-haley | 2025-06-09 21:31:40+00:00
Open-source data catalog focused on simplicity with a single binary deployment and only a PostgreSQL dependency. Features powerful search with boolean/text/metadata queries, visual lineage graphs and a growing CLI plugin ecosystem (Kafka, PostgreSQL, BigQuery, etc.) plus an API and Terraform provider
by ryandrake | 2025-06-09 21:31:51+00:00
It was a massive country-wide persecution complex. The antimaskers loved to act like they were being persecuted, as if they were freedom fighters, defending themselves against oppression. Yet, they were the ones out there attacking everyone else who were just trying to be cooperative. And for what? Just to be performatively contrary to the mainstream. COVID's legacy is a massive, sustained, consequence-free civil disobedience campaign, but instead of being organized in service of a goal, it’s just vague anger, belligerence, and contrariness for the sake of contrariness.
by rollcat | 2025-06-09 21:31:54+00:00
macOS is awful in so many places. I would prefer if they had an option to disable only some of the animations. "Show Desktop" is so sudden and zoomy I almost get motion sickness, but Mission Control is more subtle and really helps me figure out which window is which.

My strategy for multiple desktops is to not use them at all. But I'm enjoying the comfort of a 43" screen, so all the windows I need just fit.

IMHO iOS strikes an almost perfect balance. It animates things in response to continuous drag gestures (notification centre, app switching), but almost nothing else. Maybe macOS could take a page from that book? E.g. dragging the menu bar; the animation plays out in direct response to user action.
by froggit | 2025-06-09 21:32:15+00:00
> I assumed because you pulled in a linux distro that the kernel was from that distro is used too,

Thst's how docker works on WSL2, run it on top of a virtualised linux kernal. WSL2 is pretty tightly integrated with windows itself, stil a linux vm though. It seems kinda weird for apple to reinvent the wheel for that kind of thing for containers.
by PaulDavisThe1st | 2025-06-09 21:32:37+00:00
> At the extreme opposite end you have things like enterprise software using subscriptions, whereby the software continues to produce value year over year, but you're generally also paying developers' salaries to maintain and enhance the softare year over year. That, too, makes little sense in spreading out salaries as a cost over 5 years.

There's also a ship-of-theseus problem here. How much change has to happen to a codebase before it's not the same software anymore?
by iblacksand | 2025-06-09 21:33:29+00:00
I also have this question. If this is true, as you note, full deduction is only possible if the wage is constant. So would this also provide an incentive for employers not to give raises, as this 'resets the clock'.

The situation would be that employers want to keep employees for at least 5 years, but providing them with raises as an incentive to stay is also more expensive than it was previously.

Seems like a bit of a mess.
by toomuchtodo | 2025-06-09 21:34:00+00:00
Italians care enough to complain about their demographic collapse, but not enough to make policy changes. Così è la vita.

Italy's demographic crisis worsens as births hit record low - https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/italys-demographic-cris... - March 31st, 2025

Labour Shortages Persist in Italy as Nearly Half of Job Openings Remain Unfilled - https://cde.news/labour-shortages-persist-in-italy-as-nearly... March 15th, 2025

Italy’s birth rate crisis is ‘irreversible’, say experts - https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2025/01/13/zero-babie... | https://archive.today/Sa0m2 - January 13th, 2025
by rweichler | 2025-06-09 21:34:22+00:00
Mind throwing some links my way? I love me some Scott Forstall anecdotes.

Here, I'll start:

- https://randsinrepose.com/archives/innovation-is-a-fight/

- https://youtu.be/IiuVggWNqSA

- https://amazon.com/dp/B07D435DFQ
by usefulcat | 2025-06-09 21:34:31+00:00
> The extreme example is a company that buys gold on the last trading day of the year - now there is no profit! On the first day they sell the gold again and does tax eviction.

In this example, it seems like you're assuming that the revenue from the sale of the gold would not be taxable, but I don't see why that should or would be the case.

ETA: also, gold is far, far more fungible than any particular software
by irskep | 2025-06-09 21:35:07+00:00
It was actually about customers and incentives. You're right that I shouldn't have said "users;" I should have said "customers."

It's rational for businesses to do things that make them money, and to not do things that don't make them money or make them lose money. SaaS business believe that spending R&D budgets on growth hackers and web product engineers is a better return than spending those same budgets on macOS engineers. I suspect they are right.

It doesn't matter to these businesses that you personally avoid Electron apps. They don't care, and Apple has made it easy and rewarding for them not to care.
by aurizon | 2025-06-09 21:35:10+00:00
Some sort of Religious reform is needed. The catholic church was like this, until Gutenberg and the printing press and local language translations spread reading/writing and more or less eliminated religion. These religions decided to inflict their cursed aspect on African = 'saving' them - it was rank religious imperialism and I wish the Africans had killed them all. They did the same in Canada - these assorted priests were supported by the governments of the day because they worked for free and they imposed a tyrannical rule over the Aboriginals that lingers to this day. The same was done in Africa, some countries did better and a reasonable government ensued. Most were extractive monopolies - native worked and colonialists ran the show and when they revolted the colonialists were expelled. This goes on now in South African and Zimbabwe where the Boer remnants are moving out as well as being killed by random killings. China has imported millions of AK47 and related rifles and equipped the Africans to help the killing. Do not see China as a friend of Africa, they see Africa as loot.
by mrguyorama | 2025-06-09 21:36:41+00:00
If you don't want extra skepticism, don't be the richest person on earth, don't insert yourself into government, don't insist you are uber-intelligent, don't be a notable person, don't be an asshole in public, etc.

It literally doesn't matter whether it's a mistake, he does this too often to give him the benefit of the doubt anymore. Elon Musk reliably claims to be an expert in everything ever, despite all available evidence to the contrary. Elon has never demonstrated technical competence in anything.
by gregdoesit | 2025-06-09 21:37:00+00:00
You might be amused to hear that the only exception for Section 174 is software developers working at oil and gas companies!

From the legislation:

“ Section 174(c)(2) provides that the required Â§ 174 method does not apply to any expenditure paid or incurred for the purpose of ascertaining the existence, location, extent, or quality of any deposit of ore or other mineral (including oil and gas).”

Is there an explanation how software developers creating software for oil and gas companies are different than for any other industry?

Or can we assume that the oil and gas industry managed to (yet again!) have its lobbyists where it mattered?
by Beijinger | 2025-06-09 21:37:01+00:00
Why the down vote? It is true.

I took a template (very few of the code should be the same), added language support, included RSS feeds. Here it is: http://news.expatcircle.com/

(registration does not work. Have to upload the latest version. This thing is not really live yet. I will make it available on my github).

BTW, VS Studio is the best software MS ever produced.
by jweir | 2025-06-09 21:37:08+00:00
You know not what you speak of. I am small developer without funding.

For every developer I hire I pay tax on 90% of their wages in year 1.

So, if I hire a 200k a year developer, I have an increased tax liability of 180k. That works out to paying about $75k ~ $85k. So my 200k developer becomes an 285k developer.

Now, eventually I could regain that cost, or I could do like I know of a few companies and commit tax fraud by not correctly reporting my expenses.

BTW even as a partner I am hit by this - to correctly file my taxes I have to report my retirement savings as development revenue and pay tax on what is supposed to be tax free.

Pretty cool.
by jwarden | 2025-06-09 21:39:15+00:00
What straw man? The assumptions underlying the theory of QF are spelled out cleanly in the original QF paper. The article is just enumerating these assumptions and showing they don't hold in reality.

The numbers in the example are indeed impossible to measure. But QF is claiming *optimality* -- that it maximizes social welfare -- when certain assumptions hold. To show that QF does not maximize social welfare when these assumptions don't hold, it suffices to show a single hypothetical counterexample.
by neilv | 2025-06-09 21:39:19+00:00
Yes, disappointing handling of the bug reports, discouraging that person from doing bug reports again for anyone.

As a submitter, you can decide to invest in someone's detailed bug report form, including attaching screenshots, etc., maybe taking an hour or more, and derailing the work mental mode you were in.

After that work, what you learn most likely happens next is one of the following:

* Silence.

* "Yes, that's a problem." Then silence.

* 6 months later, automated email saying that this bug is automatically closed, due to inactivity.

* 2 years later, automated email that they've done a new release, so they've decided to throw away all open bug reports. But if you still find the bug in the new version, you can file a new bug report, they graciously offer.

* "We know about that bug, but we aren't going to fix it." For reasons you don't understand. And if there's a cultural mismatch, the tone can come across as hostile or disingenuous, besides.

* "This is a duplicate of bug X." It is not.

* Closes the bug report suspiciously, perhaps for optics or metrics.

* (Silence FAANG Special Edition: A high-profile bug report, on which tens or hundreds of knowledgeable people are adding on, for years, all saying this bug is a huge problem, and many asking in the bug report comments why is nobody from the FAANG even acknowledging this bug report in their own bug system.)

Suggested practice: If you ask others to invest in reporting bugs (by having that bug report form there), then follow through in good faith on the bug reports you receive. (At least on the bug reports that seemed reasonable, and that invested effort in your process.)
by eadmund | 2025-06-09 21:39:59+00:00
> what is the corporate tax rate?

21%

> It's not 100%, so you're deducting a fraction developer's salary from your income, right, you're not saving that much on your tax bill each year. you're paying tax on the income you used to pay the developer.

Which is a problem if you don’t have the money to pay the tax.

Let’s combine your and the parent’s examples: 1 principal engineer @ $300,000/year; 3 engineers @ $200,000/year = $900,000/year. $1,000,000 in sales.

year 1: Company makes $1,000,000 and pays $900,000 to engineers for a $100,000 cash profit; it deducts $180,000 from $1,000,000 for a $820,000 paper profit, and owes $172,200 in taxes. Since $172,000 > $100,000, it has a $72,000 cash loss for the year. There is not year 2.

Or maybe it raises enough capital to have a cash cushion. A similar thing happens in year 2: it makes $1,000,000 and pays $900,000 to the engineers for a $100,000 annual cash profit, deducts $360,000 from $1,000,000 for a $640,000 paper profit and owes $134,400 in taxes, still more than the cash profit. The cumulative cash losses are now $106,400.

Once again in year 3 it makes $1,000,000 and pays $900,000 to the engineers for a $100,000 annual cash profit, deducts $540,000 from $1,000,000 for a $460,000 paper profit and owes $96,600 in taxes. Hey, it doesn’t owe more than it made in taxes! On the other hand, its cumulative cash losses are now $103,000. Three years, three million in revenue, 2.7 million in expenses but it’s in the hole by $103,000, still more than its annual profit.

In year 4 it makes $1,000,000 and pays $900,000 to the engineers for a $100,000 annual cash profit, deducts $720,000 from $1,000,000 for a $280,000 paper profit and a $58,800 tax bill. It still has a cumulative $61,800 cash loss.

In year 5 it makes $1,000,000 and pays $900,000 for a $100,000 annual cash profit, deducts $900,000 from $1,000,000 for a $100,000 paper profit and a $21,000 tax bill. Good news, the company now has a cumulative cash gain! At the end of five years and $5,000,000 in sales the capital owners have made … $17,200. The engineers made $4,500,000 and the government made $483,000.

In year 6 it makes $1,000,000 and pays nothing (this is very unrealistic, because in the real world every product requires maintenance …) for a $1,000,000 cash profit, deducts $720,000 from $1,000,000 for a $280,000 paper profit and a $58,800 tax bill. People complain that it’s only paying a 5.88% tax rate, ignoring the years of amortised losses. But hey, after $6,000,000 in sales the owners finally have $958,400. They take it as a dividend and it gets taxed at the top marginal rate, so they pay an additional $354,608 in taxes.

In the real world, of course, sales may or may not cover salaries, sales may increase or decrease from year to year, markets may change and so forth.

> I don't care what the law says, pay enough that no one can say that you're a lamprey on society, please.

That’s an impossible target. Any random person can say, unreasonably, that someone else is a ‘lamprey on society.’
by jongjong | 2025-06-09 21:41:06+00:00
Yep spot on. Price does not equate cost. Especially in our current economy where profit has been artificially made a non-factor. To know the cost, you'd have to look at hardware resource usage per query. Given that recent models have over a trillion parameters, you need a huge amount of memory and CPU to process a query to get the electrons to traverse all these thousands of billions of ANN nodes and/or weights.

Ultimately, it may turn out that dumber models may be more economically efficient than smarter models once you ignore the investment subsidy factor.

Maybe, given the current state of AI, the economically efficient situation is to have lots of dumb LLMs to solve small, well-defined problems and leave the really difficult problems to humans.

Current approach, looking at pricing is assuming another AI breakthrough is just around the corner.
by Negitivefrags | 2025-06-09 21:41:41+00:00
If you pay people to make 1000 chairs that are just sitting there, do you really think that you don’t have an asset on your books at all? This is called Inventory. It’s certainly an asset.

And an asset doesn’t come into existence out of nowhere. It comes into existence because you paid money for it. And the money you pay for it is indeed the persons salary.

Now sure, it’s possible to get away with not doing this, but it’s not correct by accounting standards to do so.

As for which standards, International Financial Reporting Standard (IFRS)
by fabian2k | 2025-06-09 21:41:43+00:00
All the conflict of interest stuff is just a giant smokescreen. Kennedy is anti-Vaccine, he might sometimes pretend to not be againt vaccines but that is just misdirection. He's going to sow doubt about vaccines, he already removed vaccines from recommendations against all scientific evidence and will make new vaccines (and even adapted versions of existing vaccines) much harder if not impossible to approve.
by Gerardo1 | 2025-06-09 21:42:17+00:00
All very fair caveats/heads up about Ed Zitron, but just for context for others: he is an actual journalist that has been in the tech space for a long time, and has been critical of lots of large figures in tech for a long time. He has a cohesive thesis around the tech industry, so his thoughts on AI/LLMs aren't out of nowhere and disconnected.

Basically, it's one of those things you may read and find that, all things considered, you don't agree with the conclusions, but there's real substance there and you'll probably benefit from reading a few of his articles.
by notjustanymike | 2025-06-09 21:42:26+00:00
> Gen Z don't use devices with knobs and buttons anymore, therefore we should all design our interface elements to look like nothing in particular?

Knobs work as a tactile interface that require two fingers minimum to rotate predictably. With digital screens we lost the tactile element, and mandated a new one finger (thumb) minimum. Interfaces had to adapt, which is why knobs were replaced with sliders. Changes like this happened all over the place; not because of "gen-Z", but because they were the most effective solution for the platform.
by amy214 | 2025-06-09 21:42:35+00:00
Not just those but there are various other lesser known latent viruses such as JC virus and BK virus. Most of us are infected with these viruses latently. For most of us, they do nothing (that we know of!) for life. For the immunosuppressed (eg AIDS, organ transplants), because there is no immune system to keep these viruses "latent", they do actually reactivate and cause problems. For viruses which operate by embedding themselves in the DNA itself, such that for some time the virus may only exist as information encoded in some nucleotides and not a physical virus, to cure that would be a powerful achievement
by froggit | 2025-06-09 21:43:20+00:00
> Thst's how docker works on WSL2, run it on top of a virtualised linux kernal. WSL2 is pretty tightly integrated with windows itself, stil a linux vm though. It seems kinda weird for apple to reinvent the wheel for that kind of thing for containers.

Can't edit my posts mobile but realized that's, what's the word, not useful... But yeah, sharing the kernal between containers but otherwise makes them isolated allegedly allows them to have VMesque security without the overhead of seperate VMs for each image. There's a lot more to it, but you get the idea.