MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by beder | 2025-06-16 20:04:45+00:00
At one point at Google, there was a huge chunk of code that was hard to understand, probably at the wrong place in the network stack, and stubbornly hard to change. And it kept growing, despite our efforts. We renamed it "[Foo]Sorcery" (this was about 10 years ago); people stopped trying to add to it, and periodically someone would come in and remove parts of it, all thanks (I think) to the goofy (and somewhat scary) name.
by ssc23 | 2025-06-16 20:04:54+00:00
location:

1. < 40 min from at least one major airport 2. < 30 min from downtown of a tier 1/2 city 3. Multiple seasons

house: 1.Open layout with tons of natural light 2.Fully private backyard

bonus: 1.Ability to add Rooftop Solar with decent MWH generation 2.Additonal underground water source
by neilv | 2025-06-16 20:05:07+00:00
Something I've wondered that's maybe related: How many people "feel" systems?

Like, if you're designing, building, or managing a large and complex system, and there are concerns in different aspects of it, and you have maybe a kind of emotional coprocessor about it, e.g., keeping track of all the parts that bother you, and how much they bother you? (Also, parts that you like.)

I'm pretty sure that not all people have nearly the same capacity for this, but I don't know the distribution.
by skissane | 2025-06-16 20:05:35+00:00
My niece Summer (on my wife’s side) died from complications of leukaemia a couple of years ago, aged 13. They say the survival rate is now >=90%, but someone has to be the ~10% who don’t and unfortunately she was one of them. It wasn’t directly from leukaemia, she had a blood clot (apparently a side effect of chemotherapy) and that caused a fatal pulmonary embolism.
by akdev1l | 2025-06-16 20:05:59+00:00
I guess the point is that the articule does not prove what he did is better in any of the ways he claimed except for the “I understand it” part

Making changes like this claiming it will result in faster code or more smaller code without any test or comparison before vs after seems to be not the best way of engineering something

I think this is why the thread has seen a lot of push back overall

Maybe the claims are true or maybe they are not - we cannot really say based on the article (though I’m guessing not really)
by macote | 2025-06-16 20:06:01+00:00
This was originally in the HN submission title, but this comment from the maintainer is mind-boggling:

> GitHub has confirmed that the block.txt file in the repo has been responsible for over 1 petabyte of bandwidth per day — mainly due to automated downloads (likely from Adobe’s Chrome extension). This is way beyond what a single repo is designed to handle and poses a risk of the repository being temporarily disabled as early as June 13.

https://github.com/Bon-Appetit/porn-domains/discussions/70#d...
by ChadNauseam | 2025-06-16 20:07:00+00:00
I'm glad to hear it as I'm very interested in Unison. (I've been watching them from the sidelines for ages.) For those not in the loop, it's a language where your code is stored on disk in AST form, not textually. The AST representation is smart in many ways - for example, renaming a function is an O(1) operation, regardless of how often the function is used. They also have a way to serialize Unison functions and send them over the wire to other Unison programs, which is pretty sick. Their site is here: https://www.unison-lang.org/

(I'm mostly interested in it because I think it would be an ideal language for videogame scripting & modding)
by maplant | 2025-06-16 20:08:05+00:00
People absolutely drink wine and chit-chat with each other. They can't during the day usually because they have work.

It seems to me that these modern anti-social tendencies are actively driving a wedge between most people and their surroundings, making people further isolated from each other. Young people tend to spend time in doors alone because they don't know _how_ to interact with strangers. But they should because being alone is literally damaging to your health.

Being far away from friends is bad for you[1]. Being socially isolated is bad for you. Promoting a lifestyle in which you don't have friends and don't talk to strangers is akin to promoting a lifestyle in which you don't exercise.

It's not "awesome", it's a necessary component of living healthily as a human being.

[1] https://www.cdc.gov/social-connectedness/risk-factors/index.... - I found this source from the CDC but there are numerous others
by jakelazaroff | 2025-06-16 20:08:11+00:00
We don't need to entertain "perhaps this happened because X Y and Z" fantasy scenarios, because we know why it happened. From the thread:

> They just came out and said it:

> “We both know why you’ve been detained…it’s because of what you wrote about the protests at Columbia”

https://bsky.app/profile/alistairkitchen.bsky.social/post/3l...
Show HN: Calendar that intelligently schedules your tasks for you
by georgeslz | 2025-06-16 20:08:17+00:00
I'm building Rhythm—an AI calendar that intelligently schedules your tasks for you.

All you need to do is type your tasks in natural language, and Rhythm will schedule them, including breaks, your preferred working time, etc. Fully customizable and intelligent. Syncs with your Google Calendar.

Curious - would this be something you'd find useful? Would love any feedback

Waitlist here if you're interested https://rhythm.lifestyle
by thomastjeffery | 2025-06-16 20:09:05+00:00
How could we possibly know that? Copyright has existed since before the industrial revolution even started. What you described is not really that far from reality today: most artists are not really making a living. The words "starving artist" have not even begun to lose their meaning. Every artist I know has been failed by copyright. The value a copyright creates is not applied to the art: it's applied to the moat around the art. The only certain beneficiaries are the giant corporations that use their collected moats to drown out small competition, including artists.
by noduerme | 2025-06-16 20:10:21+00:00
Those things do show an intergenerational evolution of complex techniques, though, if only by trial and error. Certainly at some level they must have understood the tumor to be the cause of a malady, for instance. Even now we know of drugs whose biological pathways are poorly understood. Scientific understanding often follows rather than precedes the discovery of a technique. Which is fine! Someone, somewhere, makes a discovery or an incremental improvement to a technique that works in practice. Eventually someone else comes along and tries to reason about how that works. Both add to the body of knowledge. I dsiagree that something can only be characterized as "advanced" if it is fully understood. Advancements also build upon practical knowledge.
by fracus | 2025-06-16 20:10:43+00:00
Not in source code, but the word is also officially used in aviation as an automated audio warning to the pilots to, IIRC, slow down or pull back. The system screams "Retard! Retard! Retard!". I think they often hear it during normal landing procedures.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SbLHah4XUwk&t=815s
by nwienert | 2025-06-16 20:10:57+00:00
First - I really want something like this to exists and be great, so best of luck. As of today I'd consider this or Dokploy (Docker Swarm is underrated).

Small feedback - your "Why you should NOT use Canine" section actually is a net-negative for me. I actually was thinking it was cool that it may actually list downsides, but then you did a sarcastic thing that was annoying. I think you should just be frank - you'll have to purchase and manage servers, you'll be on the hook if they go down and have to get them back up, this is an early product made by one person, etc.
by Arathorn | 2025-06-16 20:11:06+00:00
For Element, I suspect they'd be best off using Element Server Suite (https://element.io/server-suite) which are the official helm charts for Element, Synapse and the various component parts. To scale elastically they'd need the Pro version, but we could provide them with a discounted license of some kind (but not free, given Element isn't profitable yet and we need the $ to actually work on Matrix...)

If anyone reading this wants to talk, hit me up at matthew at element.io (or @matthew:matrix.org on Matrix)
by kamilchm | 2025-06-16 20:11:17+00:00
After 20+ years building CI/CD pipelines, I've developed a systematic approach to pipeline architecture.

The framework combines:

- Golden Path: 6-step core workflow foundation (commit → build → test → staging → production → monitoring)

- Pipeline Pillars: 7 foundational capabilities that can be implemented in any order based on your needs

The guide covers the complete framework with actionable checklists for each pillar.
by dkjaudyeqooe | 2025-06-16 20:12:25+00:00
I feel like an open source RV CPU is very likely in the high-performance space.

The amount of effort required to design and implement such a device makes it difficult for a single company to invest in, but many interested users of it could band together to create a viable open source implementation.

I guess it's a question of a project that such an effort can crystalize around.
by perihelions | 2025-06-16 20:12:36+00:00
> "Calibration apparatus"

I believe it's kali from German Kaliumhydroxid[0] (KOH, what it uses to dissolve CO2), from the same "potassium" root as al-kali in English, from medieval Arabic[1]. (And also metonymically a name for the coastal salt-marsh plant[2] from which medieval workers sourced potash/potassium[3]. I actually submitted that plant to HN [4] a few days ago, but no one was excited about it. They were once an essential ingredient in glassmaking, hence their other name, "glasswort").

[0] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaliumhydroxid

[1] https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/kali#English

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salsola_kali

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potash#History

[4] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44128748
by PaulHoule | 2025-06-16 20:13:12+00:00
Even though Postgres is a pretty good database, for any given hardware there is some number of rows that will break it. I don't expect anything less out of LLMs.

There's a much deeper issue with CoT and such that many of the domains that we are interested in reasoning over (engineering, science, finance, ...) involve at the very least first order logic + arithmetic which runs into problems that Kurt Godel warned us about. People might say "this is a problem for symbolic AI" but really it is a problem with the problems you're trying to solve, not a problem with the way you go out about solving them -- getting a PhD in theoretical physics taught me that a paper with 50 pages of complex calculations written by a human has a mistake in it somewhere.

(People I know who didn't make it in the dog-eat-dog world of hep-th would have been skeptical about that whole magnetic moment of the muon thing because between "perturbation theory doesn't always work" [1] and "human error" the theoretical results that were not matching experiment were wrong all along...)

[1] see lunar theory
by ojo-rojo | 2025-06-16 20:13:32+00:00
But that means we'd prefer whichever theory our species had landed on first. Basing our preference for a theory on that timing seems kind of arbitrary to me. If they're the same in other respects, I'd take a look at both sides to see if there are other compelling reasons to focus on one or the other, such as which is simpler. Of course if they make different predictions that'd be even better, time to get to testing :)
by serbuvlad | 2025-06-16 20:13:41+00:00
On the webpage at the "Why you should NOT use Canine" section, it is possible to swipe away a card that is in the background, which is very weird UX.

Chrome 137. Android 13.

Other than that... I'll give it a shot. Have three N100 NUCs. Two are currently unused after failed attempts to learn to use k8s.

Maybe this'll do the trick.
by JohnFen | 2025-06-16 20:13:45+00:00
I don't know if it's cause or effect (it's probably a little of both), but when "consuming content" became the way people talked about this stuff, it was a very bad sign for quality and interesting media.

It's just such a reductive and devaluing way to even think about this stuff that I don't see how it couldn't affect what people who think of it in those terms produce.
by QuantumGood | 2025-06-16 20:13:50+00:00
I remember in the 1990's when I felt very strongly that in chess, rook pawns could be advanced far more often than they were in Grandmaster games. And in recent years modern computers confirm that (it has been called "the rook pawn revolution"). Looking back on it a bit later, I realized I had no logical, left-brain systems support for it, only one of the strongest "systems" feelings I can remember ever having. I also grew up on the spectrum, with a side of moderately severe anxiety disorder, and extreme difficulty sleeping.
by aDyslecticCrow | 2025-06-16 20:13:55+00:00
Bad quality work is a much bigger problem than dishonest work. Systematically well-done research with fake results or data is much rarer than just... lazy bad science.

There is a massive incentive to publish. Inflate the value, inflate the results, and stretch out projects to multiple smaller papers, fake results to make it seem important. This is lazy and fast, and can be caught by a stricter review and scrutiny.

Papers that are properly done all the way through, but with faked data meant to push an agenda, can be disproven by counter research.
by eddythompson80 | 2025-06-16 20:14:45+00:00
> Any other examples of that? I'm particularly interested in that for this kind of software product.

As far as I know, this pattern is not uncommon among traditional businesses. King Arthur Flour Company is the largest one that comes to my mind, but on a local level; grocery stores, restaurants, mechanic shops, plumbing businesses, etc very often "change ownership" this way.

In software, it's pretty common in informal OSS project to transition ownership this way when the original owner/author loses interest or is otherwise unable to maintain the project.

In terms of commercial sortware, something like SketchUp comes to mind, though it's not exact path. It was a startup, acquired by Google, then spun off again with its employees
by danhor | 2025-06-16 20:15:32+00:00
Most car trips could be replaced with ebike trips, but the majority of distance travelled (and thus, roughly, carbon emitted) can't. 80% of the distance driven is with trips >10 km, 70% of the distance driven already at >20 km. There are people doing these trips on E-Bikes daily, but even with great infrastructure they'll remain a small proportion of the modal split (Data from Germany, MiD, 2017). The long(er) trips are the majority of the problem, as the rest are, well, short.

Most rail should be powered by overhead electricity, but for short- to medium-term gains BEMUs are also great, with most European train manufacturers not building DMUs anymore. They'll hopefully also come down in price, as this first generation is really expensive.

I know that the US (and Canada) has issues with battery busses, but in (western) Europe, they work great (but currently still a tad too expensive). Trolley busses are even more expensive (similar if not higher purchasing cost, much higher infrastructure cost, slightly less energy usage) and require a whole lengthy political process to deploy, while battery busses can be deployed in a few months.

BEVs are the only feasible solution for replacing a large part, if not most, of the emissions from cars. Even in countries with a great countrywide transit network and reasonable bike infrastructure (Germany), 73% of passenger-kilometers are traveled by car (MiD 2023, 19% by transit, 4% by bike, 4% by walking), down from 80% in 2002. There is no way to much more than double transit usage in the next 15-20 years. And the situation is much worse in e.g. the USA where little good transit exists, where good infrastructure exists operations suck, building transit is astoundingly expensive, land developmental patterns run contra feasible attractive transit and transit agencies seem unable to learn anything from outside the US (in operations, construction, planning, ...).

This is not to say that anti-car policies (and pro-walking/biking/transit) policies shouldn't be implemented and are in many cases preferable compared to subsidizing BEVs, but their potential in the short- to medium-term for carbon reduction is quite limited.
by eddythompson80 | 2025-06-16 20:15:44+00:00
> "holding the bag" scenario, not?

Only if they are buying it for what the investors had already put into it, which is not likely. They most likely discussed how much the investors values physical assets and trademarks the company holds (like how much they are likely to get back in a bankruptcy) plus whatever makes a deal fair and maintain a happy cordial relationship with said investors for future endeavors.
by sandworm101 | 2025-06-16 20:15:53+00:00
Once upon a time planes dropped only gravity bombs that just fell with the forward speed of the launching aircraft. These exploded directly under the aircraft (see all ww2 footage). Then were developed "retarded-fall" or delayed bombs with fins or parachutes so that the bomb's forward movment slowed and it exploded behind the aircraft (see vietnam footage of bombs with pop-out fins). Then came laser-guided "smart" bombs. So we now have "smart" bombs which are guided, "dumb" bombs which arent, and "retarded" bombs which are dumb bombs that slow down. We have accidentally fallen into pc trap where it can be difficult to use these terms.

Retarded fall "snakeye" bombs: https://youtu.be/3_RM19hOMo4
by dakial1 | 2025-06-16 20:16:28+00:00
https://techcrunch.com/2014/02/19/whatsapp-will-monetize-lat...

Zuck Says Ads Aren’t The Way To Monetize Messaging, WhatsApp Will Prioritize Growth Not Subscriptions

"Monetization was the big topic on today’s analyst call after Facebook announced it acquired WhatsApp for a jaw-dropping total of $19 billion. That’s $4 billion in cash and $12 billion in stock, and it reserved $3 billion in restricted stock units to retain the startup’s employees. But Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg, CFO David Ebersman, and WhatsApp CEO Jan Koum all said that won’t be a priority for the next few years. And when the time does come to monetize aggressively, it won’t be through ads"
by rfl890 | 2025-06-16 20:16:51+00:00
I'm very confused at first glance. What are "coder scripts"? Why is "std" repeated 3 times in "dk StdStd_Std.Run"? What on earth is "Tr1Stdlib_V414Io"? The entire tool comes off as arbitrary and confusing, at least to me. I would really quite appreciate a brief primer on the language and its design decisions, architecture and syntax. So far, I'm just having assorted bits of information thrown at me with no real structure.

(Note: I have never touched OCaml. Is this some weird OCaml thing?)
by oidar | 2025-06-16 20:18:40+00:00
The IARC grouping isn't for effect size though, it's for certainty about carcinogenicity outcomes with exposure. It's not going to tell you how much exposure you need to get cancer. There are different measurements for that.

IARC Grouping Levels: Group 1 - We are certain this will cause cancer Group 2 - Probable it causes cancer Group 3 - We don't know if it causes cancer Group 4 - Unlikely to cause cancer

So when looking at something like tobacco smoking, we have lots of evidence that people who smoke get lung cancer. So it doesn't fit in group 2,3,4. So it goes in group one.

For scales that measure exposure needed for negative outcomes, most of the time these are for chemicals that are/have been used in work environments. So EPA (and probably OSHA) has a threshold scale for benzene, but not for tobacco cigarettes. Most of the time, there aren't MSDS (Material Safety Data Sheets) for consumer products like cigarettes.

But really, what is more likely - a person getting cancer from tobacco smoking or benzene? I would offer that tobacco is more of a danger than benzene d/t the easily available nature of it. So in practice, tobacco is more of a danger than benzene.
by cycomanic | 2025-06-16 20:19:01+00:00
I was posting this the other day. I find that all llms no matter their benchmark scores make enough mistakes that I always have to check their work, so pretty much any chat with an llm ends up like this: Me: question... Llm: certainly the answer is... Me: that answer can't be correct because of some test case... Llm: Certainly, my previous answer was obviously incorrect (if it was obviously wrong why give it to me?), here is the correct solution

The same pattern continues for a couple of iterations until I get the correct solution.

The problem is, the llm responses are so slow that I could just work out the problem myself in the time (I typically ask questions that I know I can solve, it just takes too much time at the moment, e.g. Just yesterday I asked a question about some interlocked indeces, which I was to lazy to work out myself at the time).

Instead of the llms with increasing benchmark scores I want an llm that is of similar level to the current ones, but answers instantaneously so I can iterate quickly.
by film42 | 2025-06-16 20:19:24+00:00
Looks great! I'm definitely in the market for something like this; and building on top of helm charts makes me want to try it out.

Can Canine automatically upgrade my helm charts? That would be killer. I usually stay on cloud-hosted paid plans because remembering to upgrade is not fun. The next reason is that I often need to recall the ops knowledge just after I've forgotten it.
by Dylan16807 | 2025-06-16 20:19:41+00:00
Starlink can do half a gigabit per beam and point 8 beams at the same cell.

With 5000 people on a ship, that's enough bandwidth for half of them to watch HD video at the same time.

On land they want to spread out the bandwidth as much as possible, but on the ocean most cells are empty or only need a time share fraction of a beam, so they might as well focus on those mini cities.
by Scratchthat | 2025-06-16 20:20:59+00:00
An interesting thinking point on this is to, more broadly, consider the impact that advances in machinery have made to humanity's industrial sector. There are vast stories and accounts of people fearful of job loss/redundancy when we have inevitably developed an automation to take over more repetitive/mind numbing tasks. What ends up happening, generally, is you see humanity gain the ability to discover and innovate as they now have the time and energy to put into it.

What's interesting is I have to wonder if this is something that would extend to our own way of thinking, as discussed here with the short term affects we're already describing with increased dependence on LLMs, GPS systems, etc. There have been studies which have shown that those of who grew up using search engines exclusively did not lose or gain anything with respect to brain power, instead they developed a different means of retaining the information (i.e. they are less likely to remember the exact fact but they will remember how to find it). It makes me wonder if this is the next step in that same process and those of us in the transition period will lament what we think we'll lose, or if LLM dependency presents a point of diminishing return where we do lose a skill without replacing it.