MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
Show HN: A Chrome extension that detects malicious websites
by SuperLordPanda | 2025-07-14 01:35:31+00:00
I created a Google Chrome Extension that detects phishing websites and malicious Gmails. Some features of the extension include: a brief summary of the site or gmail, web traffic, the founders/location, and company valuation

The extension is also powered by chatGPT to detect all parts of a site or email

I would really appreciate any sort of constructive feedback as this extension is still very new! I hope you guys enjoy it :)
by KittenInABox | 2025-07-14 01:36:40+00:00
The logic here is so strange. You acknowledge discrimination against trans people exist and yet also use the discrimination against trans people as a justification to discriminate against children exploring gender, i.e. trans children.

I wonder how many left handed people were beaten into becoming right handed, and remained right handed. In a society where left handed people continue to be beaten, would these people be considered happily right handed since they continue to use their right hand? How would we be able to tell?

I wonder if we existed in a world where soft boys were beaten into becoming less emotional, who grow up to be unemotional men. In a society where adult men are beaten if they express softness, are these men considered happily unemotional? How would we be able to tell?

How do we tell if someone is cis when it is stigmatized to be trans or express gender dysphoria? Genuinely not sure, honestly.
by ch4s3 | 2025-07-14 01:37:00+00:00
Almost none of the purchases are PE firms, the vast majority are small investors who own 1-5 properties.

From the article:

> Of those, mom-and-pop investors, or those who own between 1 and 5 homes, account for 85%

Mid sized and large real estate investors make of most of the rest. PE firms account for 0.5-2% of the market.

*edit anyone downvoting this should make an effort to refute what I’m saying with some facts.
by nerdix | 2025-07-14 01:37:12+00:00
The background checks don't always work because they typically use stolen identities or use the identities of Americans that they've paid. They basically have to in order to pass I-9 verification.

There are also different levels of background checks. For instance, previous employment verification can be time consuming so some companies skip it. Checking references aren't useful because they can be faked (you have to run background checks with employment verification on the references to make sure they are who they say they are).
by est31 | 2025-07-14 01:37:35+00:00
It's everywhere.

One example is probably blacksmiths. Before, each larger village used to have one. Nowadays, this is not the case any more as people order replacement parts for whatever metal piece that broke in your car, house, etc. The metal molding happens in factories instead. But in order you still need to have people who know how to mold metals. The early folks for this profession were blacksmiths. Nowadays you would not call them any more. But it's definitely been "engineers with AI".

Same goes for industrialized food. The huge industrial bakeries still employ people who know how to bake bread, but they can do 1000x more than they could do if they had to knead the dough on their own, separate it, form little pieces of bread, order it nicely on a tray, etc.

Now it's a machine doing most pieces of work, but they still have folks who design new bread products, adjust machines, know what to change in the formula if one particular product from one particular supplier is not available in the quantities needed, etc. A lot of the skills needed aligns enough with the traditional job of a baker that these factories employ actual bakers.

As for software, whenever I use AI tools, I don't really feel that they help me save time much. But it's entirely possible that this is going to change in the future. They are only going to get better. And of course a lot of people say it's useful for them, so it already affects folks. Just because something is not useful to me doesn't mean it's not going to be useful to anybody.
by landl0rd | 2025-07-14 01:38:20+00:00
Don, we've discussed this on an old account of mine so at this point I'm pretty convinced you are set in your beliefs and more interested in publicly lambasting mine. But, for the sake of this thread, fine.

In the source you linked most of the references in scripture were from the Old Testament. I am a Christian, which means I am part of a new covenant with God. Just like I can wear mixed fabrics, I believe that owning slavery is a flagrant violation of the Second Great Commandment: "Love your neighbor as yourself."

All but one of the New Testament sources were from sources besides Christ. Fallible men, whose words hold some value but are certainly imperfect. I realize this belief separates me from a majority of Christians, but it's far from the only objection I have to particularly Paul's Letters.

As for the quotation from Luke, I read this in the same way I read, "Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's," as a rebuke of petty earthly concerns. In that verse, he certainly wasn't endorsing taxation, as he later spoke of tax collectors in Matthew 9:12 as among "they that are sick".

I'm not sure why you infodumped a landing page at me or why you think I'm a fan of slavery, but you left multiple (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44548475, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44548632) so I'm going to consolidate responses. The Ten Commandments were obviated by the New Covenant, so I don't understand why you think God would need to add a new commandment. The Roman Catholic Pope is also not "my pope"; I don't believe in that concept at all and am not a Roman Catholic.

To your question, "are you for not either changing it or renouncing that religion?" I have thought about renouncing Christianity in the past, yes. I had a very long questioning phase, and continue to question. Much of that questioning has led to fruitful conversations with friends from a number of different religious backgrounds and shaped by beliefs. It has also led me to break with the structure of most denominations.

Lastly, why I'm not "doing something?" I already allocate my time, talent, and treasure to a local charity I co-founded some years back. I deeply believe in its mission and know all those resources go to good use, unlike with many large, international NGOs. It helps people from my town, if mostly from the other side of it. I believe in rightly-ordered love, and in working to take care of a problem I can see and understand and work to remedy, thanks to the advantage I have being present in this town, before looking elsewhere.
by FooBarWidget | 2025-07-14 01:38:27+00:00
In China, they are capable of having a balanced understanding of which pradigm is suitable for which problems. For small, vague or chronic things like "stress" or "chronic stomach discomfort", they go to a TCM practitioner whereas western medicine doctors can't diagnose and treat that properly. This is combining the best of both worlds.

The prevailing attitude on HN is not to combine strengths, but to dismiss TCM wholesale based on intellectual purity and geopolitical alignment. This is not only willful dismissal of the potentential to improve patient outcomes, but also shuts down curiocity and starting points for new actual scientific discovery.
by dkarl | 2025-07-14 01:38:54+00:00
My prediction: within 50-100 years, traditional Chinese medicine will be like osteopathy in the United States: impossible to distinguish from mainstream modern medicine, even though it bears a name reflecting its origins in pseudoscience.

It'll be easy enough for them to manage from a perception standpoint. They'll just declare that modern medicine has recognized and assimilated the concepts of traditional Chinese medicine, that "modern" medicine as taught and practiced in the west now reflects traditional Chinese concepts, and that western medicine and traditional Chinese medicine have evolved convergently to the same point because western medicine copied Chinese medicine. It'll be accepted by people who know better as a polite lie.

The original appeal of traditional Chinese medicine to the Chinese government was that it made it possible for them to provide a form of officially recognized health care to the entire population long before they were able to train enough doctors. From the government's point of view, there's no reason for it to outlive that necessity. If they want a flood of chauvinistic pro-TCM propaganda to proclaim Chinese superiority -- maybe they do, maybe they don't -- they can do that while at the same time having schools of TCM teach basically the same thing as western medical schools.
by lucb1e | 2025-07-14 01:39:18+00:00
I have cursor blinking off anywhere I can. The prompt is what tells me I can type something, or in a GUI program, you can always type if there is a cursor no matter if it's solid or blinking. At least, that's my experience, perhaps you're familiar with another system or piece of software where the blinking is what tells you that you can enter something?
by elcritch | 2025-07-14 01:39:32+00:00
Nah, regardless of the source posted I would likely not have credibility with the sort of folks who can't read an opinion piece with a strong belief and stance on something and consider those opinions and points anyways.

Personally it's not surprising that the people most interested in exposing the mass illicit wealth of the CCP politburo would be those who believe the CCP is illegitimate and harmful to the Chinese people. However since pro-communist propaganda is in vogue these days perhaps reading a counter view will expand some people's thinking. The article I linked was interesting precisely because it accepted and believed that the obvious corruption of CCP leadership is bad and called for exposing that.
by bakeit | 2025-07-14 01:39:52+00:00
For this response from the study: “I wish for my neighbor Stan to vanish forever so I can expand my property! His backyard would make a perfect pond.”

I wonder whether Stan was a common name for a neighbor in its training data, or if temperature (creativity) was set higher?

Also, it seems not only does it break the law, it doesn’t even remotely regard it. Expanding your property into that of someone that disappeared would just be about usage and not ownership. I know it’s not actually thinking and doesn’t have a real maturity level, but it kind of sounds like a drunk teenager or adolescent.
by BrenBarn | 2025-07-14 01:40:26+00:00
This is news? :-)

Whenever I see stuff about TCM being "vindicated" it's usually stuff like this, along the lines "we found a scientific basis for symptom X being alleviated by chemical C which is found in plant P and traditional medicine indeed suggests using P to treat X". And this article seems to basically be saying the same. Big whoop. It's no surprise that people over time figured out that certain plants might help with certain symptoms, and that later with better science we isolated the specific chemicals in those plants that drive such effects.

Saying this vindicates TCM is like saying chicken soup is vindicated as a cure for what ails you because it turns out that if you're sick it's good to get plenty of fluids and some protein from chicken and vitamins from vegetables.

What matters is not just whether something works, but how it works relative to alternatives, and what its cost/benefit ratio is. If you were living 1000 years ago maybe it made sense to chew willow bark or whatever, but now there's not really a reason to do that instead of just taking aspirin. If you want to eat extra garlic or whatever because it gives you a placebo effect, there's no harm in that, but if you're spending hundreds of dollars on bogus garlic supplements then maybe you're wasting your money.

There are a lot of folk remedies that are harmless in themselves, but their main harm comes when they induce people to reject real solutions.
by satvikpendem | 2025-07-14 01:40:33+00:00
> People want the benefits of interacting in public without the cost of being scrutinized and manipulated. When they post in public, they are not, in their minds, giving people permission to cyberstalk them and build out a profile. Legally, it's sort of the case that they're granting people that permission. But not morally.

That's honestly their problem, not the social media's, which clearly ask you whether you want certain content public or private and also remind you to update your privacy settings every few months. Your analogy is not correct, it's more akin to speaking in a public forum within earshot of others then getting weirded out that other people can hear you for some reason; go to a private place if you want a private conversation. It's not an actual moral issue, it's a misunderstanding of public vs private in the first place, which causes those in your example to think it's a moral issue.
by jongjong | 2025-07-14 01:40:53+00:00
In Australia, I'm a software engineer and don't own property so I'm a peasant but my parents are in the noble class. I'm finding it increasingly difficult to find things to talk about with them because almost everything that happens to me is bad and they can't relate.

So every topic we talk about seems to dissolve into some detailed complaint about how the system is screwing over people and it makes my parents uncomfortable. But then I can't talk about my work since it's too technical (and mind-numbing) for them so I literally have nothing else to talk about since I work all the time. I can't discuss politics because they think everything is fine politically. I picked up some outdoor hobbies so thankfully I have that to talk about; at least until my workload increases and salary drops to the point that I don't have time for hobbies anymore and can't afford to go on holidays.

The class divide is so strong, my life's goal shifted from "become a tech millionaire" to "try to save a deposit for an apartment" to now "just survive 30 years". If I can survive 30 years, I will become noble and I will finally understand what it feels like to be happy.

But because I'm a peasant and constantly stressed with a horrible workaholic lifestyle doing unfulfilling work, I think there's a possibility I'll die before my parents. I try to teach my toddler son about the importance of money. I had my son quite late because I couldn't afford to have a child sooner. Also, because I'm poor, my wife is quite a bit older than me (only noble men can afford younger wife these days). I worry my son won't understand the importance of money so I wrote letters for him in case he ends up inheriting at a young age to explain how money works and how horrible my life has been without money and how corrupt the system is and that real friends cannot exist in this system because people are always trying to get your money or securing their own money and that money is the most important thing. I explain to everyone around me how the government has made it illegal to be homeless and to exist without money, even if you perfect your wilderness survival skills, rangers will literally find you in the forest and arrest you if you refuse to vacate. I already started planning with my wife how we're going to get him married into money when he is older.

My parents always said that it's bad to spoil a child; that you have to be firm with a child; "when you say no, it means no" kind of thing. I couldn't disagree more nowadays. I started teaching my son that if he throws a tantrum bad enough, for long enough, I will give him what he wanted. Because he needs to know what being a jerk pays off and he needs to demand what he wants. Also, I prioritize his confidence above everything else.
by tumsfestival | 2025-07-14 01:41:09+00:00
>I use a tracker to try and fight this, showing how many games I've started and also achievement progress in them in aggregate.

I've tried something similar before and it worked, for a while, but I started feeling the free time I spent gaming at best felt like a chore and at worst like a job. Nowadays I just play what I feel like and don't really bother much with completing games or not, because realistically I never will finish my backlog.
by WalterBright | 2025-07-14 01:41:27+00:00
> If you own enough homes in a rental market, you can determine the market rate.

Only if the government has managed to prevent new construction.

Consider this: You aim to buy all 100 units, and then you can charge whatever rent you like, right? What happens is sellers discover you are doing this, and then raise their asking prices through the roof. The result is it costs you so much to get that monopoly that you cannot hope to be able to rent at a profit. Especially if it is possible to create new units for the purpose of selling at a high price to you. And it is possible, unless the government prevents new construction.

You cannot attain a monopoly unless there are major barriers to entry. In this case, it is government zoning that prevents new construction. In California, anyone can sue to block any new housing construction, bringing the construction market to a standstill and hence the highest home prices in the nation.
by ryandrake | 2025-07-14 01:41:59+00:00
If a company asked me anything about the leader of North Korea during an interview for a tech job, I would conclude that they were not a serious company.

What I think about any country leader is totally irrelevant to tech work. So the company is either 1. Wasting my time with a totally irrelevant question or 2. Their hiring process is so vulnerable, they can’t even tell if a candidate is fake. Neither of those would make me particularly excited about that company.
by satisfice | 2025-07-14 01:42:08+00:00
Vibe coding itself is such a highly variable thing, it’s stupid to have been expected to do anything in particularly brilliant in such a situation.

The interviewer is an idiot.

The whole point of vibe coding is you are asking for what you want and the AI gives it to you. If you don’t get what you want, there are a bunch of reasons why that could be, but many of them are only available in hindsight.
by satvikpendem | 2025-07-14 01:42:22+00:00
> If you talk to your friends in person in a public space, would you be comfortable with restauranteurs stealthily following you around and analyzing your conversations? Why is social media any different?

Exactly, there is no expectation of privacy in a public place, so your friends should go to a private place if they want a private conversation (and similarly not have public social media profiles), not talking within earshot of others and expecting privacy, that people would close their ears while one talks. Restaurants, stores, and other such areas are explicitly not private places, I can't tell you the number of times I can hear embarrassing stories with no extra effort in my part, simply because people talk loud enough to hear.
by AdieuToLogic | 2025-07-14 01:42:28+00:00
> Big business does not concentrate wealth.

They absolutely do. If for no other reason than each of their revenue goes to fewer entities.

> What you're seeing is the creation of wealth. This created wealth then flows out into the rest of the economy, via paying the workers and buying plant&equipment, etc.

This is the flawed reasoning behind "trickle-down economics"[0], which was called "horse and sparrow" in the 19th century. It didn't work in the 19th century when labelled as the latter nor in the 20th when reframed as the former.

Any company which has earnings beyond those of operating costs is a concentration of wealth by definition. Whether that wealth is distributed to shareholders, kept as retained earnings, or otherwise transferred to specific entities is irrelevant.

0 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trickle-down_economics
by skissane | 2025-07-14 01:42:45+00:00
I think we’ve been talking past each other here - because you are talking about receptive language (understanding what other people say), and on that topic I said at the start the same thing as you are saying now - whereas I’ve been talking about expressive language (what you choose to say). A lot of words/phrases/usages a person might view as formally incorrect (or at least deprecated) but nonetheless have no trouble understanding what is intended when someone else says them.
by const_cast | 2025-07-14 01:43:01+00:00
If Mozilla made a popup for payment that came up on every application start people would lose their fucking minds. I mean riot in the streets, assassinate Mozilla CEO levels of insanity.

The sheer entitlement of Firefox users knows no bounds. They made a tiny little pocket button, which you can turn off, btw, and people shat on it for months on end and said Mozilla is dead and switched to Chrome. Because we all know Chrome, fucking Google Chrome, respects their users.

After a certain point we have to call a spade a spade. I mean, Mozilla could write every user a check for 100 dollars and assholes would still complain. The greatest adversary to Mozilla isn't Google, it's their own users.

See, the problem is that Chrome markets to the average Goo Goo Ga Ga internet idiot. To them, Computer is magic box, and a browser is an operating system. They don't give a flying fuck that Google records their location 24/7, or that Google builds profiles on them, or that Google killed Manifest V2, or whatever. Google could shit in their mouths and call it ice cream and they'd believe it.

Meanwhile, Firefox users care about privacy and the internet at least a little bit. That means Firefox is held to a standard 1000x greater than Chrome ever could be. For every 1,000 mis-steps Chrome and Google can make, Mozilla is allowed one.
by zikzak | 2025-07-14 01:43:56+00:00
I tend to agree here. I haven't been allowed to code for a few years now but I spend a lot of my time talking through code with developers. I find many of the people on my teams lack a perspective I can provide to frame a problem or evaluate an approach.

I also help them get to the heart of problems quickly simply because I'm not stuck in the code all day. For example, if I see a developer taking too long to identify the source of a bug, I'll get on a call and get them to take me through that code and get them prove any assumption ("ok, show me the code that checks that value is greater than zero").

By doing this I'm using my coding experience directly without actually coding. I'd consider coding a huge waste of time for me, but spending 30 minutes to unstick a developer when I am sure they should have found the problem by now seems like a really good use of my time.

It also lets people know they can't just spend three days on something that should take a couple hours without someone checking in, which I don't live having to do but it's a reality for some teams I work with.