MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by jahewson | 2025-07-14 20:00:30+00:00
The ignorance here is just staggering. Every single person arrested for any and all crimes in the US is initially detained without being charged with a crime. This is normal. The police do not charge people with crimes: courts do. This is called an arraignment and it must occur within 48 hours of arrest. There is zero non-standard conduct from ICE in this regard.

ICE officers are required to identify themselves “as soon as practical or safe” as a regulation. They are not required to identify themselves in the same manner as state police because they are not state officers, they are federal officers. Federal law applies to them, not state law. Again, zero non-standard conduct from ICE.

> Do these actions not fit these definitions?

No they absolutely do not, because we’re talking about law enforcement so the only reasonable frame of reference is the legal definition of these words not the “I feel like it” definition. By your definition all arrests are “taking someone away by force” and are therefore abduction: obviously a stupid definition.

I think it’s entirely possible for the government to abduct people: please don’t put strawman words into my mouth. You have, however provided zero evidence to make your case and in fact demonstrated quite clearly that you don't understand the most basic everyday workings of our legal system.
by kfajdsl | 2025-07-14 20:00:40+00:00
This is my number one complaint with LLM produced code too. The worst thing is when it swallows an error to print its own error message with far less info and no traceback.

In my rules I tell it that try catches are completely banned unless I explicitly ask for one (an okay tradeoff, since usually my error boundaries are pretty wide and I know where I want them). I know the context length is getting too long when it starts ignore that.
by NathanKP | 2025-07-14 20:00:40+00:00
Unfortunately, midway through the project I lost the file where I was keeping track of all the prompts I used as I built. I do have some of them, plan to publish a wrap up analysis of those at some point.

If you were referring to the prompts inside of the game, you might find those fun and interesting. This one in particular is the heart of the game: https://github.com/kirodotdev/spirit-of-kiro/blob/main/serve...
by trehalose | 2025-07-14 20:00:53+00:00
I vaguely recall reading that as a rule of thumb, mouse doses of various drugs tend to be equivalent to around ten times higher than human doses in terms of mg/kg. (Don't quote me on that.)

It's not true that there's no overdose risk with psychedelics. Ones that are partial agonists of the serotonin 2A receptor, like LSD and psilocybin, are fairly safe, physiologically. Psychedelics that are full agonists of that receptor, like NBOMe- phenethylamines (which are commonly sold as LSD!), can be deadly vasoconstrictors at dosages not far beyond a pleasant dose. They have killed people. Anyone taking "LSD"/"acid", who didn't make it themself, should be aware of this.
by sshine | 2025-07-14 20:01:55+00:00
Let's call it "advertise his own product", since he gives the software away for free and hardly makes money on licenses.

I would say that it is.

He is freeriding on the PuTTY brand name to popularise his own SSH client.

It definitely has an element of being questionable. It won't win him the Nobel Peace Prize.

But it isn't even a "dark pattern": He's not tricking anyone to make the wrong choice.

He has provided a clear and unambiguous download path to the original PuTTY for two decades.

Which of doing that and selling a domain to the highest bidder has had more value to PuTTY?

I remember using the putty.org domain 20 years ago when I was still a Windows user, and remembering "I know this isn't the official site, but he forwards to the real distribution page, so there's no risk." And it never was any different.

I find it a little incredible that the moral police comes around decades later, when I remember one sentiment back then was "Wow, he's making the effort to make PuTTY more reachable, what a nice guy."
by chasd00 | 2025-07-14 20:02:07+00:00
I was on a team of about 25 involved in pitching a particularly large deal to a public sector client (think US state/local governments). The audience was about 50 people from different departments and agencies throughout the state and our pitch team consisted of about 6-8 very big shots + me the computer nerd. During our prep and rehearsals a "look book" was distributed which consisted of write ups on each person expected to be in the audience. It was very detailed with a career and education history of each person, a personality analysis, where their interests/passions lie both at work and personally, and what topics and key points set them off. The deck was very professional and not something thrown together, i was impressed but a little taken aback too.
by svieira | 2025-07-14 20:02:08+00:00
My favorite example is the story about a data broker who, the day after 9/11 happened went from the name "Muhammad" to a list of ~1K people which included 1 out of 4 of the 9/11 terrorists.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/22/magazine/hank-asher-data....
by godelski | 2025-07-14 20:02:14+00:00
> True capitalism can never exist

To nitpick, you mean "unfettered capitalism". As in no government involvement. Which has the identical problem to unfettered anarchy: coalitions form, creating governments. Since many markets have network effects (e.g. bulk purchasing gives lower price per unit) a monopoly tends to be one of the possible steady state solutions. But any monopoly can choose to become a governor of their market, being able to impose regulation even through means other than government (e.g. pull resources, poach, lawsuits, or even decide to operate at a loss until the competition is dead (i.e. "Silicon Valley Strategy").

I just mention this because it's not a problem exactly limited to capitalism. It's a problem that exists in many forms of government and economics (like socialism). It just relies on asymmetric power
by macNchz | 2025-07-14 20:02:24+00:00
As with any investing there's a risk appetite/timescale component to thinking about this stuff. Lots of companies went to zero in the dot-com bubble. Even Amazon was down over 90% between the end of 1999 and late 2001, and took until 2007 to recover to its high. NASDAQ overall took 15 years to return to its March 2000 high. Some incredible returns to be had if you waited it all out, to be sure, but it's hard to know what the interim looks like.
by cornholio | 2025-07-14 20:02:25+00:00
> 2.86 miles per day is the practical MAXIMUM, given perfect conditions

In your particular setup.

A typical car can expose about 3 square meters of lateral area for those same 8 hours, and receive 3 kW of irradiance. multijunction cells can exceed 50% efficiency, so we're talking about a theoretical upper limit of 12 kWh electric per day.

That would require a vehicle totally covered in cells, including the windows, so not very practical, but adding up to 30 miles/50 km per day is nothing to sneeze at.

We could also imagine all sorts of solar receivers that engage during parking and inflate the apparent surface within the limits available, track the sun etc. to maximize energy.
by Imustaskforhelp | 2025-07-14 20:02:29+00:00
Sorry I guess, I may have been incorrect in that regards. I actually just meant as in comparison to juniors really. And I personally felt that way from what I've heard from all the people, I am not sure too about salary rising but still I always thought that seniors are getting on with more and more responsibility since juniors aren't getting hired and so I thought that they were more compensated and I am pretty sure that I heard it somewhere and I think I just repeated that.

Also maybe I felt this way because of 100 Million $ and the 30 Billion $ acquisition by Zuckerberg I guess

I might ask AI (Oh the irony) and here is the chat https://chatgpt.com/share/68756188-d374-8011-9f23-6860d6b1db... and here is one of the major source of this I suppose

https://www.hackerrank.com/blog/senior-hiring-is-surging-wil...

And I would like to quote a part from the hackerrank ie. Taken in isolation, this might suggest a cautious but healthy rebound. But viewed through a 2025 lens, a deeper pattern emerges: teams are leaning hard into experience, and leaving early-career talent behind.
by aesh2Xa1 | 2025-07-14 20:02:34+00:00
I understood your argument, and I did already address the point you want to continue with here.

> ultimate use (who buys the end product of China's emissions), and historical contributions. However, to ignore China's absolute , ongoing contribution as the world's largest emitter (by far: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/annual-co2-emissions-per-...) is clearly an error.

"Ultimate use" discusses consumption by the West. This fact does not exonerate China, as China directly causes the emissions in order to satisfy its economic ambitions, and profits from its _factual_ role as the leading emitter of greenhouse gases. If China did not offer these exports, perhaps someone else would. But right now, it's China.

I also threw in "historical contributions" to throw you a bone. Nonetheless, right now, its China and China's emissions are, even still, increasing.

If you want to pass the buck to the West that's fine, but the reality is that China is producing more emissions than anybody else is, and it does it for the benefit of China at the expense of the planet.
by sparkie | 2025-07-14 20:02:34+00:00
Not sure I like the `become` keyword. Seems bizarre - someone encountering this word in code for the first time would have no idea what it's doing.

Why don't they just use `tailcall`? That would make it's obvious what it's doing because we've been using the term for nearly half a century, and the entire literature on the subject uses the term "tail call".

Even better would be to just automatically insert a tail call - like every other language that has supported tail calls for decades - provided the callee has the same signature as the caller. If it's undesirable because we want a stack trace, then instead have some keyword or attribute to suppress the tail call - such as `no_tail`, `nontail` or `donttail`.

Requiring tail calls to be marked will basically mean the optimization will be underutilized. Other than having a stack trace for debugging, there's basically no reason not to have the optimization on by default.
by red-iron-pine | 2025-07-14 20:03:14+00:00
> I just buy second hand thinkpad for half of that if I want a good enough one.

happy that works for you, but for my data center environment, where I need a bunch of cheap, simple laptops in the colo -- and in some cases, burner laptops for dubious countries with data centers -- cheap and simple is the requirement.

2nd-hand and refurb create question marks as to security and reliability, and we already have enough holes and questions.
Ask HN: What Changes When Adtech Moves from Keyword to Context-Based Targeting?
by arvind_k | 2025-07-14 20:03:21+00:00
Adtech is seeing a major shift—from keyword-based targeting (search, bid, intent) to more context-driven approaches (content, behavior, semantics, attention signals). With increasing privacy regulations, deprecation of third-party cookies, and rise of LLMs, the ability to interpret context in real-time is becoming central to modern ad targeting.

I'm curious:

What are the key technological shifts when moving from keyword to context-based ad targeting?

How are platforms adapting—especially DSPs, SSPs, and publishers?

What impact will this have on existing ad revenue models (e.g., CPC, CPA, CPM)?

Who is actively working in this space right now—either startups, research labs, or open-source communities?

If you're working on this, experimenting with new approaches (e.g., semantic embeddings, on-device inference, or federated contextual targeting), or looking to collaborate—I'd love to connect and potentially partner.
by marcosdumay | 2025-07-14 20:03:27+00:00
Yep, I can get behind sortition between qualified candidates.

I disagree with your example, but things like deciding supreme court justices over the population of judges or department heads over the population of professors seem quite ok.

For lawmaking in particular, it looks like a bad idea. There will be lots of people trying to con the uninformed representatives into behaving badly.
by PaulHoule | 2025-07-14 20:03:29+00:00
I think it could have.

The early phase of the war, when there was a lot of motion and the successful and then failed counter-attacks were very similar to what war planners thought might happen maybe 1000 miles or so miles west, at the Fulda or Suwałki Gaps. US Army manuals circa the 1980s (I have a collection) quote a lot of material from Russian Armed Forces manuals describing how their defensive lines work, how they expect to do maneuver warfare, etc.

Back then there were many "red lines" crossed by both sides, particularly the use of US-supplied weapons to attack targets on Russian ground, that hypothetically could have been cause for a nuclear war. Those lines got crossed, there was no nuclear war, it's hard to believe it's going to happen now.

The war is now in a frozen state where the Russians gain ground at a glacial rate and it seems unlikely that Ukraine is going to get very much terrain back any time soon. So some kind of escalation seems unlikely, rather steady attrition.

The scenario where China invades Taiwan and the US tries to organize resistance from the Philippines and via a carrier group and China takes a nuclear shot at a carrier group is more believable, particularly as we become economically decoupled.
by ghc | 2025-07-14 20:03:35+00:00
As a student, ask around or check with your advisor. Most labs will have positions for students interested in coding "grunt work" because students are cheap.

As a professional, apply to Masters/PhD programs in your area of interest, or be young and an expert in an obscure technology the lab uses. Some labs will hire out contract work, but can't pay well (hence be young). Other labs have grant money to bring in non-phd researchers, but to get the job you'll both have to be an expert in a required technology, and be able to contribute actively to the research area of the lab. At Yale, I did this, as second author on a conference paper showing novel methods for applying machine learning in multi-agent, sensor -driven environments. It justified my paycheck as a researcher while I spent the other half of my time fixing broken code for other researchers and writing the first version of the software for our lab spinout.

Edit: I just want to clarify that my experiences with this don't go past 2010, so YMMV. Getting old is tough sometimes, it still feels like almost yesterday.
by mrguyorama | 2025-07-14 20:03:50+00:00
The simple counterpoint is that lack of data didn't stop the nazis a single fucking bit, and ICE has no problem breaking down random doors and harassing legal establishments.

This absurd idea that all we have to do is "defang" the government and we can safely ignore it, as if the problems that these data sets are built to work towards fixing would magically go away, or magically mean that people who experience those problems wouldn't still try to get something done about them, except now outside of a legal framework of any sort.

Do you actually think people with broken governments are more free in their world of arbitrary penalties and non-existent solutions?

A blinded government isn't less dangerous when it gets hostile. It just makes it more random and less well targeted. But that won't STOP it.

The holocaust would have happened just the same even if we never made counting machines. The main difference with IBM helping the Nazis is that we have good data about who died in the camps and good documentation. Funny that doesn't seem to matter to morons who think it's a hoax though.

Or do you honestly believe Jews faced no oppression and extermination in the areas without good data on them?

The actual answer is, as always, the hard one: Suck it up and pay attention to your government, participate in democracy, advocate for good politicians, understand how our system is somewhat broken and non-representative, and vote for people who will make it more representative.

There's no option to disregard politics and stay safe. If enough people in your country want you dead, no government can protect you of that if you stay disengaged. Ask the native americans how safe they ended up without a comprehensive database of their existence. We nearly exterminated the buffalo to solve that "problem". Because it was popular. No IBM needed.
by anigbrowl | 2025-07-14 20:04:18+00:00
Not as callous as pinning all social problems on migrants who mostly just want economic opportunity, and who generally commit crime at lower levels than the domestic population. Nor is it as callous as shrugging off the social and economic losses inflicted on those countries when they were colonized in the first place, or 'granting' them freedom without compensation for the looting, murder, and de facto enslavement.

working class people

I've got a feeling you're not a socialist, though.

pseudoscience

FUD
by drooby | 2025-07-14 20:04:35+00:00
"When I read the story to a group of about 100 psychiatrists at an American Psychiatric Association convention in New York City and asked them what punishment Billy should receive, the most popular suggestion was that he should be locked in a cage with vicious dogs and torn to pieces."

I come across info bits like this every once in a while and I can't help be think... were they really answering the question truthfully, and just having a little laugh to themselves? Or, are we really this close to reverting to midieval behavior if our modern justice system crumbles
by lukas099 | 2025-07-14 20:05:06+00:00
I agree. A quick search tells me the practice was started for legibility in hand-written manuscripts [1], or for that and also to emphasize the importance of the writer (seems egotistical to me :)) [2], or those reasons and also to help distinguish English from other languages but we don't really know [3].

[1] http://www.alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxwhyisi.html [2] https://www.thesaurus.com/e/grammar/whycapitali/ [3] https://greatbigstory.com/why-do-we-capitalize-the-word-i/
by specialist | 2025-07-14 20:05:21+00:00
Though "participatory democracy" sounds like "direct democracy", they are distinct.

]Further, by eliding deliberation, the initiative process is the worst kind of direct democracy. Except for mob rule, of course.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Participatory_democracy

The OP narrowly focuses on the calculus (?) of how randomly choosing reps actually promotes meritocracy.

This wiki article is a good overview of the whole burrito.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens'_assembly
by vlod | 2025-07-14 20:05:46+00:00
As a linux user I hate this. I know 100% that the MacbookPro (16'', m4 whatnot) is probably the best developer notebook out there, but I just can't feel good giving Apple my money.

Until recently I was a die-hard macbook-er, but Apple has turned evil (look at iOS, there's another article on HN about iOS browsers are still webkit based, even though EU has apparently slapped their wrists or Airpod buds which are closed to developers (Zuck was complaining about this recently)).

So I use a Thinkpad Carbon, Linux and hope RISC-V will come from on high one of these days.
by p0w3n3d | 2025-07-14 20:06:09+00:00
I'm not getting into details. Open Source is getting quickly beyond the "I'll do it in my garage in my free time" phase. It has a lot of illnesses (kernel patching acceptance problem etc), but if we want to have some neutrality, it should be funded. We've seen world with only proprietary software. And we don't want to come back there
by int_19h | 2025-07-14 20:06:17+00:00
Funnily enough, this was pointed out by the very people who established our federal government structure. Hamilton, Federalist Papers #22:

"Every idea of proportion and every rule of fair representation conspire to condemn a principle, which gives to Rhode Island an equal weight in the scale of power with Massachusetts, or Connecticut, or New York; and to Deleware an equal voice in the national deliberations with Pennsylvania, or Virginia, or North Carolina. Its operation contradicts the fundamental maxim of republican government, which requires that the sense of the majority should prevail. Sophistry may reply, that sovereigns are equal, and that a majority of the votes of the States will be a majority of confederated America. But this kind of logical legerdemain will never counteract the plain suggestions of justice and common-sense. It may happen that this majority of States is a small minority of the people of America; and two thirds of the people of America could not long be persuaded, upon the credit of artificial distinctions and syllogistic subtleties, to submit their interests to the management and disposal of one third. The larger States would after a while revolt from the idea of receiving the law from the smaller. To acquiesce in such a privation of their due importance in the political scale, would be not merely to be insensible to the love of power, but even to sacrifice the desire of equality. It is neither rational to expect the first, nor just to require the last."

(https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed22.asp)
by const_cast | 2025-07-14 20:06:42+00:00
> The root issue here is that the government is no longer able or willing to control and bind their own law enforcement agencies.

You're correct, but the bigger picture here is: privacy violation rely on benevolence.

We're completely at the whim of parties more powerful than us, and we MUST trust that they will act in our best interests.

Now, we could just hope and cross our fingers that people are good people forever. Do you think that's going to be the case? Because I don't. So the only path forward that makes any sense is to simply not give bad actors the potential to even be bad. Meaning, we shouldn't even collect this data.

We have so many laws of this variety, which rely on our leaders remaining benevolent. This is in stark contrast to the US constitution, which explicitly says NOT to rely on benevolence, and rather construct systems so that we can dismantle our leadership should the time come.
by slg | 2025-07-14 20:07:49+00:00
> I think with encryption, the underestimate is on the other side. Everyone understand that bad guys using encryption is bad. But people do not see the upsides of encryption for the good guys

And why are you confident that this doesn’t exist for the license plate dataset? You’re confidentially making two opposing arguments with no justification beyond it getting you to your desired conclusion on that specific issue.
by autoexec | 2025-07-14 20:08:21+00:00
> If you're gonna be angry at someone be angry at the people among us were in favor of the creation of this data set because they foolishly thought it would be used to combat mundane property crime or because perhaps they thought that subjecting motorists to an increased dragnet would be a good thing

Nah, be mad at both the people who enabled the data collection and the agency that abused that data.

This should be grounds for laws that limit or eliminate the use of Flock Safety in the state, and laws that meaningfully punish agencies that use that data inappropriately as well as the individuals who authorized it.
by mrguyorama | 2025-07-14 20:08:40+00:00
Because they DO have whatever data they want: From Palintir.

Preventing the government from accumulating a database is meaningless. But it doesn't matter anyway. Even if they didn't have any data, that's not an impediment, because there is zero pushback to literally blackbagging people off the street and sending them to another country. They just want to harass brown people and you don't need a damn database for that. Bootlickers have eyes.

This bullshit about government databases has always been a meaningless distraction. Oppression doesn't want to be precise or efficient, it's counterproductive to the goal of scaring people into compliance.

Tell me, how do you believe they are stymied at all? They've arrested anyone they want.