MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by owlstuffing | 2025-06-28 00:30:40+00:00
True, but there’s a key difference -- those earlier waves, despite being seen as "outsiders" at the time, still came from the same civilizational foundation. Europeans, whether Irish, Italains, Germans, or Poles, shared a common history shaped by Christianity, Greco-Roman influence, and broadly similar cultural norms. The friction was real, but over time, assimilation worked because there was enough cultural overlap to make it possible.

The post-1965 immigration wave brought in people from entirely different civilizations -- with no shared history, values, or worldview. That isn’t just "non-homogeneity," it’s civilizational fragmentation. And unlike the 19th and early 20th century European immigration, there’s no historical precedent where that level of deep cultural divergence integrates at scale -- not in Rome, not in Byzantium, not anywhere.
by goodluckchuck | 2025-06-28 00:31:55+00:00
Universal injunctions are superfluous. If the law says the government cannot do X, then who is a judge to command that the government not do X? That’s the legislature’s job. Judges have no authority to create rules saying people shall and shall not do certain things. That’s called passing a law. Similarly, when a party violates an injunction, who is the Judge to enforce his command? If it within a case or controversy between litigants, then that is one thing. When the judge they’re going to proactively punish someone any time the law as against anyone… that’s a purely executive function.

In terms of efficiency, it’s more efficient. Those in favor of universal injunctions are saying there should be hundreds of judges all racing to rule over the government, and to have their opinions control in the abstract as to cases that aren’t even before them.

If the government forces the same issue over and over there are plenty of remedies at hand: 1983 civil penalties against officers, sanctions against attorneys for frivolous arguments, and ultimately the court can hand the legislature everything it needs to impeach and remove a president by ruling that he / she is intentionally failing to enforce the law.
by sidibe | 2025-06-28 00:33:12+00:00
Now that all this nonstop quackery of Elon is recognized by most people, I'm surprised I still haven't heard anyone say anything about this battery swap demo that helped get them big government funding. Somehow they set up this snazzy announcement with big screens but were unable to place any cameras or lights to show the actual battery swap https://youtu.be/6_XEv2f_Uhw?si=w5nMTnv5kAxoI0oj
by grues-dinner | 2025-06-28 00:33:28+00:00
The depressing, if that's the right word, counterpoint to all the "oh my god it's fun of stars" deep fields crammed with millions of galaxies per square arcsecond is that the expansion of the universe means that nearly all of them are permanently and irrevocably out of reach even with near-lightspeed travel: they'll literally wink out of observable reality before we could ever get to them, leaving only a few nearby galaxies in the sky. At best you can reach the handful of gravitationally-bound galaxies in the local group.

Not that the Milky Way is a small place, but even most sci-fi featuring FTL and all sorts of handwaves has to content itself with shenanigans confined to a single galaxy due to the mindblowing, and accelerating, gaps between galaxies.
by Lovishotherdays | 2025-06-28 00:34:18+00:00
Thought I'd answer all of you — I'm the creator.

Momentarily is created as a art piece against how large corporations use your data and sell it on for attention to advertisers. The role of Momentarily is atleast personally a joke, to say F'you to big tech, and I'm taking back control over my own time and what or who I sell my attention to.

Most people who have actually bought know and understand it's a joke, and understand that they don't recieve "feedback" or "advice" They recieve 30 seconds of my time where I just sit and think about them. And I give them raw thoughts I'm having at that time in email form.

That could be a response to something they said, my thoughts on them, or just a fun little shitpost as a joke to lighten their day.

Although it says no refunds allowed, if anyone wants to get a refund they can literally just ask. Life's not that deep, you can make light of a shit situation, and make art.

Peace and Love, Seeds in soil. My attention is mine to give.
by surgical_fire | 2025-06-28 00:36:37+00:00
> It’s possible to consent to these things

Some people have odd kinks. While it may weird you out (and in many ways it weirds me out too) I am far less judgemental about it. If people want to be choked while fucking, well, by all means, as long as I am not involved. Most kinks I hear about are things I have no desire to experiment myself.

> I’m intensely skeptical that this is the one kind of gendered violence against women

Why do you presume that women are the only ones being choked?

And also why do you presume that a consenting adult is actually not consenting to something they are actively engaging in? Why infantilize people like that?
by charleslmunger | 2025-06-28 00:37:51+00:00
If there was another bug that allowed input data to request a large allocation, this would be?

Normally I'd want a secure parser to allocate memory with a bound, and one way to implement that is to give each parse call an allocator that fails once it reaches a limit. From a very basic scan it seems like libxml2 supports swapping its allocator function, so it could do this; although that's probably not the intended purpose since those APIs are global rather than per parser instance.

I bet what happened here is the reporter ran a fuzzer, found a report, and didn't realize that the fuzzer configuration was injecting faults into malloc so they thought it was more severe than it actually was. Missing a bounds check often results in some massive number being passed to malloc, which then returns null, so this is a common pattern to find. It's not a high severity security bug but it's reasonable to think it could be one if you didn't know about the fault injecting allocator.
by GuB-42 | 2025-06-28 00:37:59+00:00
> Idk how you truly solve this without code audits

Idk either, but code audits are definitely a solution. Take Debian packages for instance. Debian has package maintainers, and while they may no do full audits, they will at least test it before publishing. In addition, it doesn't get in the "stable" release before an extensive testing phase. Security patches are usually backported.

Or do like with the Apple App Store, where you don't get to publish anything unreviewed.

These are not perfect solution, there is no such thing as a perfect solution. For instance, Debian is famously lagging behind in versions, and the App Store will sometimes reject your app for no good reason, while being expensive. In every case there is some barrier to entry, a slow process, and it costs time and money, but that mitigates some of the issues.

Npm seems to have very little safeguards, has a culture of always taking the latest version, and as a result is often victim to supply-chain attacks. I don't think it is just popularity. Debian is really popular too, but AFAIK, it doesn't have this problem, in fact, one of the best known supply-chain attack is the xz library, and Debian didn't fall to it.
by vkou | 2025-06-28 00:40:22+00:00
This creates conflicting rulings, because now anyone who is party to a lawsuit has one precedent for them, and everyone else isn't.

If a state now sues the federal government on behalf of its citizens that a federal action is illegal, and wins, you now has a situation where a federal action is constitutionally illegal in one state, but is legal in another. How the hell is this consistent?

This doesn't consolidate anything. It removes the thing that forced consolidation - the ability of a court to issue an injunction and stop illegal actions from continuing - which forced the government to either give up, or appeal up. Now, everything is a legal patchwork.
by Lovishotherdays | 2025-06-28 00:41:39+00:00
I appreciate that bud, Thats exactly the point.

It's dystopian, but actually we do that every single day with going to work, with who we choose to use as service or media providers, the cookies we leave behind. Everything is data and our data is being sold by big tech for our attention.

The point of momentarily is to take back control over my own time and say, I get to choose who I give my attention to and for others choose who they choose to spend time with them.

Can't make art without pissing some people off.
by keysdev | 2025-06-28 00:42:02+00:00
OCaml is like nim, not many ppl knows about, but it is one those tech once over the learning curve it just gives developer an extra edge.

It is a very good alternative to memory safe language such as Rust and Swift. It is just NOT backed by big corporations. Which some might see it as a disadvantage, IMHO it is an advantage. Look at Perl, Linux, Hono all initially made by one guy.

With out a big group, golden handcuffs and corporate politics, things might actually gets done.
by monocasa | 2025-06-28 00:42:20+00:00
> But it was better at the basics than anything else in Rust, so it caught on for routine non-game programs. And here we are.

Seriously. The main tale I think is how awful Rust's story on GUIs are such that most Rust users prefer a pretty awful GUI library because it's somehow better than everything else. And that's coming from someone who's favorite language is easily Rust.
by goodluckchuck | 2025-06-28 00:42:53+00:00
Absolutely, and they discussed this. The “problem” with that is the results of a class action are binding on the class, win or lose. So it’s possible that you’re a member of the # Million person class-action claiming to be exempt from deportation because of X (because you didn’t opt-out) and the class could lose.

The Universal Injunctions were a one-way rule. If the government lost any one case, the injunction would apply against the government in every other instance. However, if the government won, only that one person would be deported and the opposition would be free to try the same argument again with any of the other judges.
by reactordev | 2025-06-28 00:44:46+00:00
As someone who plays flamenco, it starts with finger style.

Playing with your hand NOT resting on the strings or body, using TPIMRp (little p is pinky), master playing patterns. Travis picking is popular. Boogie woogie is too where you play three notes together with PIM and playing the bass line with T.

A pinching pattern or claw hammer is another method. Once you’ve mastered (I mean, can play Eric Clapton and Co) it then take it into the minor keys and learn the directional flamenco picking. Where you flick RMI downwards striking your fingernails, following it with your T in a downward pluck, then pulling IMR upwards. Some people reverse this but it’s always the same when it’s repeated. Eventually you’ll be able to picado like a pro. Malagueña watch out.

Your finger nails are now important. Learn about shaping them with a filer or getting gel tips. Your girlfriend can help in this department.

As others have said, there’s no short cut, only practice and patience. Eventually it will click.

*EDIT* https://youtube.com/shorts/IfOFLtf0h8c Paco De Lucia is a great one to study.
by GP4GLZero | 2025-06-28 00:47:12+00:00
I had a conversation with GPT in a "rational mode" setup, exploring what conditions might significantly increase the probability of AGI success.

GPT responded that the natural extension of a GP4GL (General-Purpose Fourth-Generation Programming Language) framework is AGI and world models — and estimated an 85% success rate when combined with structured API integration.

This is part of a video series I'm producing. Here's the first episode: YouTube: https://youtu.be/ZJTAK9UemWQ Transcript (English & 繁體中文): https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1_JD5y6WPUKzm-KusaWuH...

Note: Some transcript segments are intentionally hidden ([XXXXXX]) for structural or thematic purposes, and are not intended for release.

If you're experimenting with GPT yourself, I'd love to hear what it says when you pose a similar question: *“If a general-purpose 4GL existed and could be used as a thinking interface, would it increase the probability of AGI success?”*

Would love to hear your thoughts: – Is prompt-based AGI forecasting meaningful? – Is GP4GL a useful abstraction for AGI architecture?
by za3k | 2025-06-28 00:47:22+00:00
High-level array combinators seem to ignore memory locality performance details, to me. It's all fine to say you can arbitrarily reorder array indicies in a mathematical sense, but any real program that does that needs to change a lot of things. Similarly, using variant types to index into combined arrays, splits up underlying memory locality and adds "if" branches. Type systems that obscure these details will result is poorly performing code.

That said if you're going to do it, this seems like a reasonable set of primitives to do it with. I'm not a huge performance nut, so I'd love to give it a try.

I'd like to see an implementation in a language with only fixed-stride arrays. I'm not an expert, does Rust do this?
by gundmc | 2025-06-28 00:47:44+00:00
I'm reading through the Expanse books and a passage that I read after seeing your comment jumped out at me. It's a quote from Havelock:

"As a boy living planetside, he had always thought of space as cold. And while that was technically true, mostly it was a vacuum. And so a ship, mostly, was a thermos. The heat from their bodies and systems would bleed into the void off over years and decades of it had the chance."

So at least the books got it right!
by mindslight | 2025-06-28 00:48:19+00:00
I'd say that all of those usability problems are made worse by bolting on encryption after the fact. It makes it so there are now two layers of authentication/identity, rather than a single one. Whereas with built in encryption, you can always punt on solving the problems you list and make implementations that are less secure. For example, just store the keys on the server, accessed by the password. That's obviously less secure, but not less secure than no encryption.
by throwaway48476 | 2025-06-28 00:49:10+00:00
Every country has a constitution, usually it's ignored. The value of a piece of paper is only as much as the people that comprise the system that upholds it. If you completely ignore the people and just whine at them about constitution this and that they're going to ignore it and rip it up. Society is also a compact and if the supermajority wants something they're going to get it.
by kelnos | 2025-06-28 00:49:57+00:00
> You don’t have to defend yourself from the entire US government, just the government representation who shows up and decides to violate laws or your rights (and your life is in imminent danger)

No matter how much I hypothetically might train on firearms, I'm pretty sure if a SWAT team (or the federal equivalent) shows up at my house, they're going to arrest me no matter what I do. Well, no, that's not true: if I pull out a firearm, they'll kill me. No need for an arrest then.

And sure, maybe just one or two officers show up at my home. Either I still lose in a firefight, or they leave and come back with more firepower, and then I lose. I suppose before their second visit I can run? Not sure to where, though, and not sure how I'll get out of the country, living nowhere near a land border.

> 5 million people participated in the No Kings protest, more than double total active military members on US soil, for example.

I'm not sure which position you're taking here, but I don't buy the idea that one armed civilian is equal to one member of the US military when it comes to predicting who is going to win. I don't even buy the idea that two armed civilians are equal to one military member. Also consider all the right-wing nut-job militia groups in the US; they would certainly join in, on the side of the military.

Training, coordination, and access to the best weaponry (and ammunition) will win. US military will beat down 5 million civilians, no problem. Probably even 10 or 20 million. I could even see the military bombing cities; Trump already seems to think LA is "in rebellion" based on his National Guard and Marine deployments. Only hope there is that enough people in the military realize what they're doing and refuse to fight. Not sure I'd want to bet on that, though.

For people who believe the US will slide (or already has slid) into authoritarianism, and believe they have a strong chance of being targeted by the government in the future, the only sane thing to do is to leave the country now. It really hurts me to say that, but that's where we are. 77M people voted for this disgusting garbage, so this is what we have.
by kldg | 2025-06-28 00:50:48+00:00
It can be a pretty a serious and offensive accusation for sure. When a dev voices their own characters in a game and has a flat affect and/or stilted speech pattern, it's inevitable to be called AI by someone. Art I don't understand or appreciate? Likely AI. Unimpressed by a Eurovision entry? Call it AI. Some people toss this around casually, but I wouldn't.

I made myself known to be a big fool ~4 years ago. A local newspaper published an article on a particular person with outrageous claims primarily using photographs as proof. I challenged the editor directly via email, laying out my reasoning for why I was sure the images were manipulated. My arguments relied on misunderstandings on my part and the person claims were levied against showing zero deviation in position and stance while posing with multiple people during a meet-and-greet. The editor was offended and trolled me in response. I didn't let up, and he realized I was an idiot, not an agitator, and shared the full unpublished video from where the photos were taken with me, at which point I apologized deeply and made a donation. My ego was appropriately small for the following year.

Before emailing him, I shared the photos with some level-headed friends for their opinion, specifically because I didn't want to make a false accusation. They came to the same conclusion that the images were most likely manipulated, so I was very confident going in.

Now I trust this paper and people involved implicitly, but this was a lot of work to convince just one person.
by Tadpole9181 | 2025-06-28 00:51:23+00:00
In my opinion, birthright citizenship is undesirable. Like you said, it's fairly unique to America and largely exists for historical reasons.

However, there is no just world where you can revoke citizenship from existing Americans. Especially under the vague terms they used.

Furthermore, the constitution itself is what defines it in clear language. Birthright citizenship can only be changed via constitutional amendment.
by metalman | 2025-06-28 00:53:46+00:00
here is a contemporary performance, where singing and clapping , with guitar, shows another side of spanish music that is more focused on having fun, very very competent fun, but just for the joy of it, and the guitar is not that intimidating....

https://www.npr.org/2021/04/20/988256921/c-tangana-tiny-desk...
by mingus88 | 2025-06-28 00:53:56+00:00
I don’t think doing this on your own will be effective. I would only recommend these Mel bay books if you have a teacher to work with you on it

And even then these Mel Bay style beginners books are probably good for 6mo at most before you should be playing actual music

Flamenco in particular is something else. How you grow your nails, how you use your wrist, all this stuff is something you don’t want to spend hours at home doing only to realize you built a bad habit that will never sound right or even worse lead to RSI
by alganet | 2025-06-28 00:54:12+00:00
If the script does a lot of unstreamable replacements, you're right. But there are still ways out of bash.

I prefer no fork, no bashism, reusable functions:

set -euf replace () { local t= REPLY=$1 t="${REPLY#*"$2"}" test "$t" != "$REPLY" || return REPLY="${REPLY%"$2$t"}$3$t" } replace_all () { REPLY=$1 shift while replace "$REPLY" "$@"; do :; done } input="foo bar foo baz" replace_all "$input" "foo" "HELLO" echo $REPLY

Not exactly easy to write, but now that they're functions, it doesn't matter since I can reuse them.

Regarding performance, it is slower than bash, but not significantly.

Times for 1000 calls:

9.908s -- sed (one fork per replacement) 0.015s -- bash x//str/replace 0.088s -- sh replace_all

Times for 50.000 calls:

0.351s -- bash x//str/replace 0.631s -- sh replace_all

Also, you can get further performance by inlining replace inside replace_all instead of making one call another.

Note that I could have done several replacements inside a single sed pipe, but I decided to count the performance for doing it like you suggested x=$(echo $x | sed s/str/replace/). The same goes for my functions, one invokation per replacement (in fact, they are tuned for that scenario).

sed can absoltely beat the shell in scenarios where you can make one fork do lots and lots of replacements. It depends on the scenario, and how proficient you are in writing sed (which can do branching, keep state, all sorts of things portably).

--

From an architectural point of view, it makes sense to have a simpler `sh` and keep a sort of standard library of functions, instead of feature creeping the interpreter with weird arcana. It makes shells like dash easier to maintain, easier to debug, easier to port and safer.
by pmarreck | 2025-06-28 00:54:23+00:00
I see comments like this fairly often and in my entire career (I'm 53) I've never had to use a debugger. For inspection of values, I write small functions and unit tests or just output to stderr in debug modes set with env vars. I've always thought that the need to use a debugger was a code smell- too much cyclomatic complexity of single functions.
by Lyngbakr | 2025-06-28 00:55:37+00:00
This story reminds me of another told by a keynote speaker at a CERF conference. IIRC, the story goes that US government scientists on the west coast were trying to figure out where the salmon spawned in a certain region and thus conducted a comprehensive study. As outreach afterwards, they held a town hall meeting to inform the locals — including a panel with elders from the native community — of their findings. After listening quietly to their announcement, one of the elders asked, "Do you know what the name of that place means in English?" The scientist didn't. "It means, where the salmon spawn."
by toofy | 2025-06-28 00:56:44+00:00
if you had kids, would it bother you if your neighbor told you legally what your kid has access?

“no, your kid can’t have access to that pg-13 movie. why? because i won’t let my kid watch it. therefor your kid can’t either.”

if that would irritate you, then this should absolutely irritate you as well.

these people need to learn to raise their own kids and quit dictating to everyone else. we would never try to ban their waltons or whatever. they need to mind their own business.

more than 10,000 book bans have happened already, this is about to get much much worse.
by acdha | 2025-06-28 00:56:54+00:00
From another perspective, this is what is commonly referred to as Wilhoit’s Law:

> Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit:

> There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.

> There is nothing more or else to it, and there never has been, in any place or time.
by ggm-at-algebras | 2025-06-28 00:57:29+00:00
The bit at the end where they are pulled out of line at boarding was very confusing. If they were conducted back out of secure space to public space, "next minute I was aboard" short circuits re-entry to secure space.

I think the editor removed some text, and context. I read this as "we're watching you" reinforcement: they were pulled out of line, politely, shown senior staff engagement, talked to, and then put back into boarding to leave.

Also, this is presumably about the Basij, but didn't seem to say so very clearly.

It is worth remembering the Shah era had very very unpleasant police-state forces.