MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by bartblast | 2025-07-29 10:54:08+00:00
Thanks for the interest! That's exactly the vision - having Elixir everywhere in the stack is incredibly powerful. I'm actually planning to expand Hologram beyond just web applications. The eventual goal is to make Hologram a cross-platform development platform, so you could potentially target also mobile and desktop while staying in the Elixir ecosystem. Still early days, but the foundation I'm building with the web framework is designed with that broader vision in mind. Would love to hear your thoughts after you give it a try!
by dagw | 2025-07-29 10:55:26+00:00
In most cases if you want to machine harvest you have to design your field around that. A vineyard, for example, that is designed to be machine harvested looks very different from one that is designed to be hand harvested. So if you want to machine harvest blackberries at scale you probably have to plant and manage your blackberry bushes in a specific way to allow for machine harvesting.
by matltc | 2025-07-29 10:56:15+00:00
"You're just prompting it wrong. Did you:

1. set up your dozens of /\.?claude.*\.(json|md)/i dotfiles? 2. give insanely detailed prompts that took longer to write than the code itself? 3. Turn on auto-accept so that you can only review code in one giant chunk in diff, therefore disallowing you to halt any bad design/errors during the first shot?"

> ...easy to hit the 5 hour window limit in just 2 hours

I've had this experience. Sucks especially when you're working in a monorepo because you have client/server that both need to stay in context.
by throwaway290 | 2025-07-29 10:56:33+00:00
> And yes, Russians, Iranians, Palestinians are known to use crypto, for example

Yes and mostly (as in 99% by amount of crypto moved) it's their governments

For example Russia it is not legal to pay with crypto, and to cash it out allowed crypto exchanges must submit your transactions to the government etc otherwise they get blocked.

But the bandit state is free of course to use it to trade with its friends like NK (which basically runs its nuclear program on ransomwared crypto) or Hamas;)
by DoctorOW | 2025-07-29 10:58:47+00:00
Hashes don't really work that way. They don't actually give any high level of a photo's contents. You can't ask a hash to find all photos of a certain document or a meeting or anything like that. They really only detect exact copies, which makes them somewhat useful only for the most basic of copyright infringement (i.e. proving someone has a copy)
by stefs | 2025-07-29 10:59:17+00:00
i think that cycling is cleaner than other sports today. the past doping epidemics led to so much bad press cycling faced a huge sponsorship crisis. if another one of the stars would get caught today they'd take the whole sport down with them.

so, if they don't cheat as much, what's left? todays cyclists are actually a lot better than the stars of yesterday, mostly due to better nutrition. training efficiency also improved as the young stars of today are of the first generation that grew up with power meters.

i'm not very knowledgeable in the sport and my last point is a bit of an assumption, but here we go: pro cycling is mostly based in europe. the UAE team is swiss, astana qazaqstan team (a team representing the state kazakhstan) trains in spain and austria. girona (spain, near the pyrinees) is _the_ classic cycling hotspot. this means testing by officials is comparatively easy.

in other sports the training facilities are, for example, in the chinese mountains, russian provinces or in the iranian back country. getting regular testing there is hard. so imo no: cycling today is probably less dirty than most others sports.

tbh i think pogacar is just one of those rare genetic talents that show up from time to time to dominate a sport, but is doubted more than others due to cyclings tainted history. it may be possible he uses newly developed drugs that are undetectable, but i'd say innocent until proven guilty is still applicable here.
by chippiewill | 2025-07-29 10:59:38+00:00
I'm skeptical this goes anywhere legally speaking.

The categorisation regulations are a statutory instrument rather than primary legislation, so they _are_ open to judicial review. But the Wikimedia foundation haven't presented an argument as to why the regulations are unlawful, just an argument for why they disagree with them.

It should be noted that even if they succeed (which seems a long shot), this wouldn't affect the main thrust of the Online Safety Act which _is_ primary legislation and includes the bit making the rounds about adult content being locked behind age verification.
by bartblast | 2025-07-29 10:59:39+00:00
Phoenix LiveView is absolutely fantastic for many use cases and has been a game-changer for the Elixir ecosystem. I have tremendous respect for what the Phoenix team has built.

The key difference with Hologram is that it transpiles Elixir code to JavaScript that runs directly in the browser, eliminating server round-trips entirely. So while LiveView uses websockets to update the DOM from the server, Hologram gives you true client-side execution with zero latency for interactions.
by cubefox | 2025-07-29 11:00:29+00:00
The headline seems a little misleading. From the article:

> The Wikimedia Foundation shares the UK government’s commitment to promoting online environments where everyone can safely participate. The organization is not bringing a general challenge to the OSA as a whole, nor to the existence of the Category 1 duties themselves. Rather, the legal challenge focuses solely on the new Categorisation Regulations that risk imposing Category 1 duties (the OSA’s most stringent obligations) on Wikipedia.
by globular-toast | 2025-07-29 11:01:07+00:00
Pitch says it's about an asymmetry, but demo has the LLM calling a real person at a restaurant. How is that addressing the asymmetry?

But let's assume even small businesses like restaurants will adopt LLMs on the phone. So now you've got LLMs talking to LLMs that were trained to talk to people. What if we just trained the LLMs to talk to other LLMs? Surely they could complete the entire transaction in a tiny fraction of the time? They wouldn't be using any language we understand, of course.
by perihelions | 2025-07-29 11:01:23+00:00
This is full of contradictions and both-sides-of-the-mouth speech. You can't coherently argue for an "open internet" "for everyone", and simultaneously plead exceptionalism for your own website, due its special virtues[0]. An "open internet" for websites with sterling reputations is a closed internet. It's an internet where censorship segregates the desirable from undesirable; where websites must plead their case to the state, "please let me exist, for this reason: ..." That's not what "open" means!

And moreover: WF's special pleading is[1], paraphrased, "because we already strongly moderate in exactly the ways this government wants, so there's no need to regulate *us* in particular". That's capitulation; or, they were never really adverse in the first place.

Wikimedia's counsel is of course pleading Wikimedia's own interests[2]. Their interests are not the same as the public's interest. Don't confuse ourselves: if you are not a centimillionaire entity with sacks full of lawyers, you are not Wikimedia Foundation's peer group.

[0] ("It’s the only top-ten website operated by a non-profit and one of the highest-quality datasets used in training Large Language Models (LLMs)"—to the extent anyone parses that as virtuous)

[1] ("These volunteers set and enforce policies to ensure that information on the platform is fact-based, neutral, and attributed to reliable sources.")

[2] ("The organization is not bringing a general challenge to the OSA as a whole, nor to the existence of the Category 1 duties themselves. Rather, the legal challenge focuses solely on the new Categorisation Regulations that risk imposing Category 1 duties (the OSA’s most stringent obligations) on Wikipedia.")
by jzapletal | 2025-07-29 11:02:20+00:00
I've been trying to automate my real estate business but I honestly find automation so hard.

I know HOW to automate things because there's 100+ tools and they're constantly improving. But I don't know WHAT to automate. Templates like the ones in the link are too general. I need something tailored to my workflows. Don't want an agency and don't have time to investigate what exactly everyone in my company does.

How do you all solve this problem??
Show HN: AI Flag Cleanup
by GarethX | 2025-07-29 11:02:21+00:00
Flag cleanup is one of the most annoying things about feature flags. Many vendors have created little helpers. Usually they’re CLI tools that highlight mentions of feature keys in your code, or some also show you which flags haven’t been accessed in a while. But these only make things less painful, you’re still on the hook to do the work.

So at Bucket (https://bucket.co) that’s the part we wanted to solve with AI, removing the flag code itself.

- How it works:

The cleanup bot operates as a GitHub integration with Bucket. When it runs, it searches for usage of the Bucket SDK in the codebase and identifies where specific feature keys are used. LLMs are employed to refactor the code to remove the flag and eliminate codepaths that become unreachable.

So all you should need to do is review and approve the PR. Once merged, the flag itself is archived in Bucket.

- The results:

We’ve been running this in production ourselves for a few months alongside a few early-access partners. We’re seeing consistently good PRs that can be merged without changes.

However, this wasn’t always the case. Early on in development, the range in quality of solutions generated by the LLM was an issue. Most attempts were fine, but then it would add a comment somewhere unrelated, remove whitespace or change the code formatting (even if you gave it rules to follow). Many of the early generated solutions failed CI due to unused imports, incorrect indentation, lone decoration not always getting cleaned up, or unused exports failing to be removed.

You can get a surprisingly long way with an LLM and a quick prompt, but getting good results, consistently, is where the real work is.

Some of the issues we were able to solve through better prompting and using different models, while others needed custom solutions. We wrote up how we went about building it here: https://bucket.co/blog/building-ai-flag-cleanup

- Try the beta:

We’re opening the beta up to everyone, but limiting it to React codebases for now.

If you’d like to try it out: - Sign up at https://bucket.co - Enable it: https://app.bucket.co/envs/current/settings/org-integrations

Let us know how you get on.
by squiggleblaz | 2025-07-29 11:02:38+00:00
Engineers want some kind of regulation because they feel like computer systems, which they nominally control, are out of control, because of the business people's demands. They want the right to say no without having to have the consequences of saying no. But then when regulations come in, they're not about regulating business, they're about regulated interactions between people and business. And whereas the idealist sees a regulation as a chance to change things for the better, a regulator sees a regulation as a chance to preserve things as they were just before they became bad. (It takes a politician, not a regulator, to change things.)
by dathinab | 2025-07-29 11:03:06+00:00
> Especially with compile-time checking.

no compile time checking and integration tests

in general sqlx only provides the most minimal string based query building so you can easily run into annoying edge cases you forgot to test, so if your project needs that, libraries like sea-query or sea-orm are the way to go (through it's still viable, without just a bit annoying).

in general SQLx "compile time query checking" still needs a concrete query and a running db to check if the query is valid. It is not doing a rem-implementation of every dialects syntax, semantics and subtle edge cases etc. that just isn't practical as sql is too inconsistent in the edge cases, non standard extensions and even the theoretical standardized parts due to it costing money to read the standard and its updates being highly biased for MS/Oracle databases).

This means compile time query checking doesn't scale that well to dynamic queries, you basically would need to build and check every query you might dynamically create (or the subset you want to test) at which point you are in integration test territory (and you can do it with integration tests just fine).

besides the sqlx specific stuff AFIK some of the "tweaked sql syntax for better composeability" experiments are heading for SQL standardization which might make this way less of a pain in the long run but I don't remember the details at all, so uh, maybe not???

---

EDIT: Yes there is an sqlx "offline" mode which doesn't need a live db, it works by basically caching results from the online mode. It is very useful, but still no "independent/standalone" query analysis.
by BlanketLogic | 2025-07-29 11:03:16+00:00
It is based on actors and "reference capabilities". These two blogs[1,2], could provide nice introduction.

1. https://blog.jtfmumm.com//2016/03/06/safely-sharing-data-pon... 2. https://bluishcoder.co.nz/2017/07/31/reference_capabilities_...
by tome | 2025-07-29 11:03:47+00:00
Thank you for unflagging some of the posts. I think that the discussion reads a lot better now. I sympathise with the difficult position that you're in but given the hostility here to hearing views from a variety of angles I'm afraid I don't think I'll be contributing much personally. I still think this topic makes HN a worse place to be and it doesn't have to take place here. There are plenty of more suitable venues.
by tdeck | 2025-07-29 11:06:10+00:00
> Like the fact that one side has offered a two-state solution,

True. Hamas has offered this since 2017 [1] but Israel has never honestly offered it. And it's practically impossible anyway at this point with all the illegal (under international law) settlements in the west bank, supported by the IDF. Something you wouldn't do if you were trying to move toward a "two state solution", but something you would do if that was just talk intended to delay any implementation of Palestinian human rights in Israeli occupied territory while finalizing a drawn out campaign of ethnic cleansing as fast as you think the US will allow.

[1]: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/may/01/hamas-new-char...
by cess11 | 2025-07-29 11:06:41+00:00
After the tutorial, if you choose morporkian as language and Ankh-Morpork as starting location you'll be put in one of the busiest places in the world, outside a bar. Either outside or inside you'll find people who can help you get started. The 'say' command says something to the entire room, and 'tell username message' sends them a private message.

There's also a newbie group chat where you can ask for help, the syntax is 'newbie' followed by your message. It'll go away once you get too many levels in your skills.

A drawback with Ankh-Morpork is that it has cops, they might interfere if you decide to attack something that isn't a rat or cockroach or somesuch, but if you get caught and put in jail you'll eventually be released. Getting killed is a bit worse, you either waste your experience points by getting a raise from an NPC, or send a message to a particular type of priest that can resurrect you.
by cthalupa | 2025-07-29 11:07:40+00:00
You have done nothing to refute any of these points because you do not understand the fundamental legal concepts at play here.

You have expressed your opinion, which you are certainly able to have, but the objective reality is that freedom of association applying to businesses is incredibly old and consistently reiterated precedent. If you want to change it in countries where this is the law of the land, you're going to need to pass new laws (and in the case of the US, amend the constitution.)

But the problem is that you seem to misunderstand the difference between being protected from the government compelling speech/association/etc. with the law compelling the protection from other individuals, businesses, etc. from being able to take action because of their disagreement with what you said.

Frankly, I have no idea how the world you are envisioning would function. It would be a neverending argument over what side trumps the other in every disagreement of this nature. It's just not viable and this is one of the reasons that the precedent here is so strong and so universal.
by geertj | 2025-07-29 11:07:41+00:00
If you'd stop the ad-hominems and suggestions of malice you'd more effectively make your case.

I'm not going to play this game of me investing my time in random links posted to this discussion, but as a once time exception:

- The first link claims a man got detained where ICE thought he had a fake ID but where he was actually a citizen. From the article: "It is not clear where the construction is located and efforts to find contact information for Venegas were not successful. Efforts to reach ICE representatives for comment were not immediately successful." So we have an unsubstantiated claim in an online publication. Is it true? Maybe. If it is, then the worst claimed here is that someone one detained. Not even arrested, let alone anything worse than that. This certainly does not rise to the claims you're making. If the article is true, this is likely an operational mistake that was corrected soon afterwards.

- The second link claims that the mosquitoes in a new temporary detention facility amount to torture. Do I like the optics of the facility? No. Do I want people in detention to get treated with dignity? Of course. The claim of torture is quite extraordinary though. If the facility is not up to standards, I have trust in the system that it will get closed.
by em-bee | 2025-07-29 11:08:38+00:00
i agree with you in principle, but i am not sure that this is simply a technical limitation. it feels to me more than just a preference. i can't explain it, but looking at the apple systems font example in this article: https://storck.io/posts/proportional-programming-code-fonts/ i find it much harder to parse (visually scanning the structure) than the monospace one below. perhaps it is simply what i am used to. but i feel like i am having a more violent reaction than i should have if mere preference and habit were the issue.

perhaps the issue is the specific choice of fonts. the author in that article exclaims that if you allow proportional fonts then any font can be a programming font, while the author of the following post claims otherwise and set out to make their own proportional font that is suitable: https://timgord.com/2024-01/lisnoti-a-proportional-font-that... . there are other such projects like https://input.djr.com/info/ and https://go.dev/blog/go-fonts

one issue is that of distinguishing similar characters, which the above projects try to address while some people claim it's not an issue at all: https://alexkutas.com/posts/non-monospace-font

there is also the issue of alignment mentioned in the first article, that could possibly be addressed by limiting character widths to multiples of the smallest width.

but there is still the issue of interacting with other programmers, mentioned in this article: https://nelsonslog.wordpress.com/2021/09/12/proportional-fon... we would all have to agree on the same font if there is any kind of alignment needed apart from indentation. right now we can say that you can choose any monospace font, and things will look as intended, but with a proportional font things will look different depending on the font choice. whether that is an issue or not needs further study i think.

more discussion of pros and cons can be found here: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/218623/why-use-monospace...
by bartblast | 2025-07-29 11:08:45+00:00
I totally get the appeal of native development! But for many of us, we genuinely love coding in Elixir and want to use it everywhere we can.

Elixir brings some incredible advantages: the Actor model for handling concurrency, fault tolerance, pattern matching, functional programming paradigms, and honestly just a really enjoyable developer experience. When you're already building your backend in Elixir and loving it, being able to use the same language, mental models, and tooling for the frontend is hugely appealing.

It's less about avoiding native development and more about 'I already know and love this language - why not use it everywhere?' Similar to how JavaScript developers felt when Node.js let them use JS on the backend, or how Swift developers felt when SwiftUI came along.
by denismenace | 2025-07-29 11:09:10+00:00
> - Signal: how can you believe it is not controlled once it becomes the mandatory app in the US Gov.

Isn't this a good sign? When the US Gov has enough trust to use it internally and officials are already using it for their communications, would this not mean that the service is truly encrypted.

They could have some sort of switch for it, but the frontend is open-source and that's where the encryption happens.
by fwn | 2025-07-29 11:09:27+00:00
The AfD came out against chat control in a 2023 press release via one of their MPs. Their 2025 platform reads well at first glance (against surveillance, pro open source, against censorship, in favor of individual data sovereignty), but it is relatively vague and feels a bit buzzwordy.

In addition to that, the AfD is not known for being predictable.

The party lacks a strong institutional core. It is shaped by competing factions, with a weak internal agenda-setting process and a tendency to align with whatever the decision maker closest to making a statement currently perceives as fitting their brand. Positions often shift as a result.

For example, they made a strong commitment to protecting cash, then later pushed for a mandatory payment card system for refugees, explicitly to tighten financial control over that group. In practice, that dramatically helps to normalize financial control through payment systems.

So, TL;DR: no one really knows. They’re inconsistent and hard to forecast.
by retinaros | 2025-07-29 11:10:28+00:00
Per gpt but it is in this range (could even look at some historians saying holodomor was much more than this) Estimated deaths under communist regimes (20th century): • USSR: 20+ million (Stalin-era purges, gulags, Holodomor, etc.) • China (Mao): 40–70 million (Great Leap Forward, Cultural Revolution) • Cambodia (Khmer Rouge): 1.7–2 million (out of 8 million population) • Others (Eastern Europe, North Korea, etc.): several million more

Estimated deaths under far-right regimes: • Nazi Germany: 17+ million (including 6 million Jews in the Holocaust, and millions more civilians and soldiers) • Fascist Italy, Francoist Spain, and others: in the hundreds of thousands to millions, depending on interpretation.
by _kb | 2025-07-29 11:11:12+00:00
Government employee here. The best engineers, technologists (and people in general) I’ve had the opportunity to work with don’t give a shit about this sort of thin validation.

No-one worth their salt in public service is there for the accolades, or money. They do it because they give a shit about the community / country / culture / cause they’re part of.

There are exceptions for sure - big project are a proven way to jump your career back to private - but the people I most respect are thinking long term and working relentlessly towards that.

In that domain technology isn’t the endgame, it’s impacts and effects are. If you want to support that, help them build tools, grow communities and attract others with a similar drive. Or if they are moving back to private because they need the money that provides, actually interview them, even if what they can put on a CV is thin on detail.

Tech doesn’t need to revolve around capital, whether that’s social or financial.