MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by iJohnDoe | 2025-07-20 00:01:20+00:00
This has been in Ring for years and police have their own dashboard. Most importantly, it was already found Ring or Police have enabled access on their own.

Based on the articles, do you really think Ring and police cannot just get whatever they want?

https://consumer.ftc.gov/consumer-alerts/2023/05/rings-priva...

https://www.reviewed.com/smarthome/features/ring-changes-pol...

https://www.silicon.co.uk/e-regulation/surveillance/amazon-r...

https://theintercept.com/2019/01/10/amazon-ring-security-cam...
by redserk | 2025-07-20 00:03:05+00:00
At some point the question is: "Do we trust the employee we've had on the books for the last few years".

Fortunately, the mid-sized places I've been at generally trust the employee's story when it comes to expenses -- at least unless it becomes a pattern.

If my workplace took the hotel's side for a bogus charge, I'm not sure I'd want to stay working there...
by pyman | 2025-07-20 00:03:09+00:00
This is exactly why we need to regulate Big Tech. Right now, they're saying: "It wasn't us, it was our AI's fault."

But how do we know they're telling the truth? How do we know it wasn't intentional? And more importantly, who's held accountable?

While Google's AI made the mistake, Google deployed it, branded it, and controls it. If this kind of error causes harm (like defamation, reputational damage, or interference in public opinion), intent doesn't necessarily matter in terms of accountability.

So while it's not illegal to be wrong, the scale and influence of Big Tech means they can't hide behind "it was the AI, not us."
by graeme | 2025-07-20 00:03:31+00:00
It's not an assumption. The article stated that non domiciled residents DO pay a lot of taxes. That's why the UK is concerned that they are leaving and modelled against that risk.

I did a quick check and it seems like non dom's are about 0.11% of UK residents and pay about 1.24% of UK taxes. And this doesn't account for indirect benefits such as taxes paid on wages they generate.
by beering | 2025-07-20 00:03:55+00:00
It’s exciting because nearly all humans have 0% chance of throwing the rock into the bucket, and most people believed a rock-into-bucket-thrower machine is impossible. So even an inefficient rock-into-bucket-thrower is impressive.

But the bar has been getting raised very rapidly. What was impressive six months ago is awful and unexciting today.
by bix6 | 2025-07-20 00:04:06+00:00
Stop comparing yourself to those people. Do you need a yacht to have a great life? No. Nobody needs a yacht. Much of wealth and circumstance is inherited, it’s a rigged game.

Surely there are things you are proud of, friends you have, people who love you, etc.

Do you know about Santosha? Try this meditation: https://youtu.be/5vI8Kh3-epg
by BirdieNZ | 2025-07-20 00:04:25+00:00
I'm trialing a NAS with Immich, and then backing up the media and Immich DB dump daily to AWS S3 Deep Archive. It has Android and iOS apps, and enough of the feature set of Google Photos to keep me happy.

You can also store photos/scans on desktops in the same NAS and make sure Immich is picking them up (and then the backup script will catch them if they get imported to Immich). For an HN user it's pretty straight-forward to set up.
by jecel | 2025-07-20 00:04:48+00:00
SPIM was the name of a MIPS32 simulator widely used in computer science research at one point:

https://spimsimulator.sourceforge.net/

RISC-V looks a lot more like MIPS than it does RISC-I to IV, so on the technical side having MIPS-the-company abandon MIPS-the-architecture was not such a huge change. And DLX that the Hennessy and Patterson books used before they were changed to RISC-V was essentially MIPS as well.
by Henchman21 | 2025-07-20 00:06:28+00:00
Honestly if, at this point you can’t see it, you’re willfully ignoring it.

We have nearly a decade of public pronouncements, hateful rhetoric, and investigations into behavior that neatly skirts legal definitions of treason.

So yes, if you can’t see it? Use your fucking imagination. Either that or open your eyes.
by pornel | 2025-07-20 00:07:21+00:00
There are some artificial limitations, but I love the upside: I don't need defensive programming!

When my function gets an exclusive reference to an object, I know for sure that it won't be touched by the caller while I use it, but I can still mutate it freely. I never need to make deep copies of inputs defensively just in case the caller tries to keep a reference to somewhere in the object they've passed to my function.

And conversely, as a user of libraries, I can look at an API of any function and know whether it will only temporarily look at its arguments (and I can then modify or destroy them without consequences), or whether it keeps them, or whether they're shared between the caller and the callee.

All of this is especially important in multi-threaded code where a function holding on to a reference for too long, or mutating something unexpectedly, can cause painful-to-debug bugs. Once you know the limitations of the borrow checker, and how to work with or around them, it's not that hard. Dealing with a picky compiler is IMHO still preferable to dealing with mysterious bugs from unexpectedly-mutated state.

In a way, borrow checker also makes interfaces simpler. The rules may be restrictive, but the same rules apply to everything everywhere. I can learn them once, and then know what to expect from every API using references. There are no exceptions in libraries that try to be clever. There are no exceptions for single-threaded programs. There are no exceptions for DLLs. There are no exceptions for programs built with -fpointers-go-sideways. It may be tricky like a game of chess, but I only need to consider the rules of the game, and not odd stuff like whether my opponent glued pieces to the chessboard.
by kayson | 2025-07-20 00:07:36+00:00
The thing that always gets me about backup consistency is that it's impossibly difficult to ensure that application data is in a consistent state without bringing everything down. You can create a disk snapshot, but there's no guarantee that some service isn't mid-write or mid-procedure at the point of the snapshot. So if you were to restore the backup from the snapshot you would encounter some kind of corruption.

Database dumps help with this, to a large extent, especially if the application itself is making the dumps at an appropriate time. But often you have to make the dump outside the application, meaning you could hit it in the middle of a sequence of queries.

Curious if anyone has useful tips for dealing with this.
by opello | 2025-07-20 00:08:08+00:00
I agree wholeheartedly. This strikes me as the way science works. Theories are useful because of their predictive value. If we think of biological sciences as different than physical or mathematical, it seems we have set ourselves up for failure. Yet that seems like exactly the kind of perspective missing and trying to be pointed out by the earlier comment's attempted splitting of the difference to "2.1 parents" to me.
by Jedd | 2025-07-20 00:08:55+00:00
Is '25 years of photos' a North American measure of data I was previously unfamiliar with?

As bambax noted, you do in fact need a backup system -- you just don't realise that yet.

And you want a way of sharing data between devices. Without knowing what you've explored, and constraints imposed by your vendors of choice, it's hard to be prescriptive.

FWIW I use syncthing on gnu/linux, microsoft windows, android, in a mesh arrangement, for several collections of stuff, anchored back to two dedicated archive targets (small memory / large storage debian VMs) running at two different sites, and then perform regular snapshots on those using borgbackup. This gives me backups and archives. My RPO is 24h but could easily be reduced to whatever figure I want.

I believe this method won't work if Apple phones / tablets are involved, as you are not allowed to run background tasks (for syncthing) on your devices.

(I have ~500GB of photos, and several 10-200GB collections of docs and miscellaneous files, as unique repositories - none of these experience massive changes, it's mostly incremental differences, so it is pretty frugal with diff-based backup systems.)
by mlochbaum | 2025-07-20 00:09:11+00:00
The point that the article is addressing (but you have to ignore the image and study the equations to see this!) is that this sort of shifting can't equalize everything. In the span of 3 white keys C to E at the front, you have 2 black keys at the back, so if you take r to be the ratio of back-width to white key front-width then you have 3 = 5r. But in the 4 keys F to B, you've got 3 black keys so 4 = 7r. No single ratio works! So the article investigates various compromises. The B/12 solution is what seems to me the most straightforward, divide white keys in each of the sections C to E and F to B equally at the back, and don't expect anyone to notice the difference.
by scorpioxy | 2025-07-20 00:09:24+00:00
My feelings exactly. For a while I thought I was missing out and then I started learning how(and why) it works and I thought it was interesting but greatly over-hyped, exactly like bitcoin was.

I tried to follow the hype and generate an application but it took a lot of time and it did generate something but not something that works with many subtle bugs. Now it may be that I needed to prompt it better, but that response also feels similar to how Scrum is always "done wrong" when it doesn't work. The result started getting better when I got more and more detailed with my prompts and then I realized that I am about to start writing code as a prompt and I may as well write the code myself.

So I still think it's an interesting tool, and it will automate away certain industries but no where near what the advertising is implying.
by popalchemist | 2025-07-20 00:09:44+00:00
Not trying to discourage you from adopting better solutions, but the delayed client-side rendering of a dynamic component like a Latex expression is almost (or sometimes literally) imperceptible to the averge user.

There is such a thing as over-optimization. All this SEO-driven performance chasing is really only worthwhile if the thing you're building is getting click-through-traffic in the millions of views.

It's a bit like worrying about the aerodynamics of a rowboat when you're the only one in it, and you're lost at sea, and you've got to fish for food and make sure the boat doesn't spring any leaks.

Yes, in the abstract, it's a worthwhile pursuit. But when you factor in the ratio of resources required vs gain recieved, it is hardly ever a wise choice of how to use your energy.
by Arathorn | 2025-07-20 00:09:58+00:00
The Matrix Foundation is currently massively underfunded (contributing significantly to many of the complaints in this thread, especially around Trust & Safety) and even then losing money. It gets no money from folks like France or NATO despite their use of Matrix. You can see the list of financially contributing projects at https://matrix.org/support - there are only two governmental entities who support Matrix directly today; Gematik in Germany and another unlisted European govt.

Element on the other hand does have a bunch of customers like NATO, but is also losing money, thanks to governmental Matrix deals often going to system integrators who win contracts with Element's FOSS software and then don't contribute any $ back to Element. I explained the mess at FOSDEM: https://youtu.be/lkCKhP1jxdk?t=740 and there's a good article about a typical instance of this (in German) at https://www.heise.de/news/Wie-Behoerden-und-ihre-Auftragnehm...

(by the way, you seem to spend a a lot of time telling everyone how shit Matrix is; don't you have anything better to do? :)
by throw10920 | 2025-07-20 00:09:58+00:00
Meanwhile, borders are required by nature, because cultures are not interchangeable and cultural friction exists, rendering borders and controlled assimilation necessary.

You also committed a logical fallacy:

> No person is illegal as borders are arbitrary

That's fallacious. All laws are arbitrary, as the GP pointed out, and you somehow failed to read:

> Speed limits are also arbitrary, enforced by other humans

So, it's factually true that borders are both necessary due to nature, and exist in the legal realm such that "illegal immigrants" is a factually correct label.
by booi | 2025-07-20 00:10:13+00:00
I think generally speaking, databases are resilient to this so taking a snapshot of the disk at any point is sufficient as a backup. The only danger is if you're using some sort of on-controller disk cache with no battery backup, then basically you're lying to the database about what has flushed and there can be inconsistencies on "power failure" (i.e. live snapshot).

But for the most part as especially in the cloud, this shouldn't be an issue.
by vidarh | 2025-07-20 00:10:15+00:00
> So the earlier French laws before ratification and implementation of the EU directive on author's rights in Law # 92-597 (1 July 1992) were also focused on the understanding of creators having creator's rights

French law, similar to e.g. Norwegian and German law, separated moral and proprietary rights.

Moral rights are not particularly relevant to this discussion, as they relate specifically to rights to e.g. be recognised as the author, and to protect the integrity of a work. They do not relate to actual copying and publication.

What we call copyright in English is largely proprietary/exploitation rights.

The historical foundation of the latter is firmly one of first granting righths on a case by case basis, often to printers rather than cretors, and then with the Statue of Anne that explicitly stated the goal of "encouragement of learning" right in the title of the act. This motivation was later e.g. made explicit in the US constitution.

Since you mention France, the National Assembly after the French Revolution took the stance that works by default were public property, and that copyright was an exception, in the same vein as per the Statute of Anne and US Constitution ("to promote the progress of science and useful arts").

Depository laws etc., which are near universal, are also firmly rooted in this view that copyright is a right grants that is provided on a quid pro quo basis: The work needs to be secured for the public for the future irrespective of continued commercial availability.
by JKCalhoun | 2025-07-20 00:12:24+00:00
Yeah, wanting to try to do that.

Someone posted this recently: https://github.com/philippgille/chromem-go/tree/v0.7.0/examp...

But it is a very simplified RAG with only the lead paragraph to 200 Wikipedia entries.

I want to learn how to encode a RAG of one of the Kiwix drops — "Best of Wikipedia" for example. I suppose an LLM can tell me how but am surprised not to have yet stumbled upon one that someone has already done.
by baxter001 | 2025-07-20 00:12:58+00:00
The fact that you think it was suggested _by_ them is I think where your mental model is misleading you.

LLMs can be thought of metaphorically as a process of decompression, if you can give it a compressed form for your scenario 1 it'll go great - you're actually doing a lot of mental work to arrive at that 'compressed' request, checking technical feasibility, thinking about interactions, hinting at solutions.

If you feed it back it's own suggestion it's no so guaranteed to work.
by Dracophoenix | 2025-07-20 00:13:19+00:00
The fact that it was removed at all was a sea-change from Valve's previous stance. Temporary or not, it set a precedent for other removals. For example, Valve had unceremoniously prevented the publication of Super Seducer 3 and retroactively de-published its prequels as a result of a campaign launched by a group of British feminists. (https://happymag.tv/super-seducer-3-steam/)
by transcriptase | 2025-07-20 00:13:41+00:00
Perhaps not, but my point stands from personal experience and knowing what’s going on in labs right now that AI is greatly contributing to research even if it’s not doing the parts that most people think of when they think science. A sufficiently advanced AI in the near term isn’t going to start churning out novel hypotheses and being able to collect non-online data without first being able to secure funding to hire grad students or whatever robots can replace those.
by j45 | 2025-07-20 00:13:42+00:00
I'm a tech creator who's a product person for a long time, as well as on the business side. Hyper-problem and user focused. Having put in the time for all 3, I agree with you fully on needing product, tech, and user experience awareness.

I can say that tech creators tend to be able to learn product and business easier than the other way around.

One reality is too many product folks don't always know what tech is capable and possible of, which can undermine the asks and the solves. So innovation can become best practices (existing) and increments from there, instead of seeing new ways digital can be delivered.

I'm all for making fun of premature optimization and abstraction into wavy concepts. That can happen as much in product practice as it does development. Maybe the sticky consumption ratio could be part of a KPI.

When building technology solutions to solve people's problems, clever architecture will always beat clever coding and clever product people. Because you make both product and code and architecture evaporate for something simple and flexible that can actually learn and have more than few chances to become what the problem needs.

Another reality is tech folks don't need interpreters like they are sub-human or something either. It all depends how the organization and it's culture is put together to value everyone.

Where tech folks are relegated to be "engineering" it's at the peril of the organization. The more layers between the customers, their problems and those who create the solution (together), the greater the disconnect that can form as the org grows.

The solution is about a table.

A round table.

Where everyone has an equal seat and can understand it together.
by newAccount2025 | 2025-07-20 00:14:47+00:00
I don’t know what I’m talking about but doesn’t that go both ways? If (say) AmEx is getting a ton of chargebacks from this one hotel, don’t they at some point say “that’s enough of that” and drop them as a client? It seems the hotel should really have a huge incentive to not do crap like this?
by throwanem | 2025-07-20 00:14:48+00:00
They don't breathe and collect sweat as if moved by a creepy fetish. They also have no style, of course, so you can look like a grade schooler while you itch your way to lasting skin problems.

For dress wear I have a selection of steel link and leather bands to match any outfit, including one steel bracelet I torch-colored myself. For casual wear and exercise I like colorful, inexpensive canvas and seatbelt-weave nylon, which are soft and breathe very well, and wash clean easily after even the sweatiest exertion.

Given the humidity this year, I've mostly stayed in the nylon. With a few carefully chosen solids and stripes, it's easy to accent any outfit, and unlike a dime-a-dozen Apple watch I actually don't mind a pop of bright color that draws some attention to what I wear.
by 1oooqooq | 2025-07-20 00:14:51+00:00
most open source clients allow you do pick the language and subtitle just fine. youtube backend is pretty decent, despite the frontend team being there just to add ads.

i recommend "PipePipe" on android.

if you are waiting for them to add that feature on the native player, remember google haven't added a single feature to gmail app besides reading email... you cannot even create a filter.
by dingnuts | 2025-07-20 00:15:42+00:00
Because the details about the activist Dave Barry appeared in a subsection about comedian Dave Barry with the title "What happened to Dave Barry," that's why. Any human encountering the information would have been in the context of the comedian, which the model forgot, in a subsection.

That's why this Dave Barry has a right. It's a subsection.

It'd be like opening Dave Barry (comedian) on Wikipedia and halfway through the article in a subsection it starts detailing the death of a different Dave Barry.
by jonathrg | 2025-07-20 00:16:41+00:00
> If casting from a string to a type works with ints and floats, why not with bools? What possible justification is there?

There's no type casting in Python. int(), float() and bool() just create objects of their respective types, passing the arguments to the initializer. They are not fundamentally different from, say, PostgresqlDriver() in this regard.

Different classes will provide different ways to construct objects depending on what is most useful. For int and float, the most useful thing to do when receiving a string is to parse it; for bool, the most useful thing to do is to check its truthiness; for PostgresqlDriver, the most useful thing to do is to interpret it as a database URL and connect to it.
by Jedd | 2025-07-20 00:17:21+00:00
Feels weird to talk about strategy for your backups without mentioning RPO, RTO, or even RCO - even though some of those concepts are nudged up against in TFA.

Those terms are handy for anyone not familiar with the space to go do some further googling.

Also odd to not note the distinction between backups and archives - at least in terms, of what users' expectations are around the two terms / features - or even mention archiving.

(How fast can I get back to the most recent fully-functional state, vs how can I recover a file I was working on last Tuesday but deleted last Wednesday.)
by mcdeltat | 2025-07-20 00:18:17+00:00
Fascinating that you can replace the nucleus of a cell and it keeps working fine, given cells are so complex... I wonder what (if any) setup/precautions are required in the cell biology to make it work. And I wonder if there are genetic conditions in which it can't work (e.g. some sort of mismatch between genes and what's already present in the donor cell)?
by opello | 2025-07-20 00:18:22+00:00
> The eggs from both the mother and the donor are fertilised in the lab with the dad's sperm.

The article seems clear. Another comment [1] suggested it should be possible to do as you suggested but I certainly do not know the science in this space.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44617740

> The spindle transfer method transplants the mother's egg's DNA into the donor's egg before fertilization
by masswerk | 2025-07-20 00:19:13+00:00
The problem being, if this is listed among other details and links regarding the Bostonian Dave Batty, there's a clear and unambiguous context established. So it is wrong.

The versions with "Dave Barry, the humorist and Pulitzer Price winner, passed away last November 20…" and "Dave Barry, a Bostonian … died on November 20th…" are also rather unambiguous regarding who this might be about. The point being, even if the meaning of the particular identity of the subject is moved outside to an embedding context, it is still crucial for the meaning of these utterances.
by constantcrying | 2025-07-20 00:20:24+00:00
YouTube apparently does not understand that bilingual people exist. I do not want translations between German and English, I understand both languages just fine.

I do not want to backwards translate some nonsense autogenerated YouTube translation to understand what some video title means. I do not ever want to watch an automatic dub where some AI voice replaces the actual language I understand.

Browsers got this right "never translate German" was enough to fix the auto translation feature. Somehow one of the most valuable companies in the world, managing one of the largest websites in the world can not implement something that basic.
by hammyhavoc | 2025-07-20 00:20:45+00:00
Element X is (e)xcellent. Just wanted to share that.

Been using Matrix via Synapse since ~2019 and all the Matrix odds and ends require the least maintenance out of anything in the stack. Any uptime issues I've experienced have been my own silly fault with incorrect configurations.

Even Element as it stands without the X builds is leaps and bounds ahead of anything else I've tried (and I have and continue to try a lot of FOSS, but nothing does what Element does as a client, nor what Matrix does as a protocol).