MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by noirscape | 2025-07-27 08:04:32+00:00
Cory Doctorow has a good term for what those big American tech companies do; rather than too big to fail, they're too big to care[0]. Because they've muscled all their meaningful competition out of the way (or at least think they do), they instead start ignoring support requests and increasingly alienating customers.

You'd think that eventually market forces would try to correct this, but in practice that doesn't happen because big companies can just buy out any entity that's an actual threat to them/cover so many areas that getting rid of them is nigh impossible. (There's some attempts to limit this from the EU and before 2025, the US as well, but a major part of the beef the US has with the EU is that they're trying to force these major tech companies to care again.)

[0]: https://pluralistic.net/2024/04/04/teach-me-how-to-shruggie/...
by jaimebuelta | 2025-07-27 08:04:44+00:00
Very confusing to read the article labelled as 1998 and have references for newer stuff (e.g. Ratatouile). The biggest one for me is to recommend a bunch of 98-propiate languages (C++) and then recommend Go! I guess that the article has been slightly updated, but it felt weird. In another language I checked the references are older.
by poisonborz | 2025-07-27 08:05:17+00:00
Deeply disagree.

Looking at the current selfhosted landscape and saying "nice but nobody will want to do this" is like looking around in 1970 and saying "nobody will want to own computers, you just rent them for tasks".

I say this after copious amounts of invested time over a timespan of 15 years to selfhost. The software landscape changed immensely. Especially now with AI, the software output and ability to learn is night and day. Software projects specifically targeting selfhosting as a mission is a somewhat new phenomena, before we had small business/enterprise tools that just happened to be down-scaleable for personal needs. We're not very far off to have great - and not just okay - click-to-install solutions.

If you don't own your infra, you are dependent. "Community hosting" is just hosting with a less reliable and more finicky admin. E2E on corporate cloud is nice but the price and terms may change any day. E2E in cloud itself is under scrutiny. A for-profit will bow to whatever legal framework they operate in. They will always want to increase those profits, easiest way for that is at the cost of what they own: the userbase and their data.

Selfhosted security is an issue, but individual users are harder to scrape/target and offer less of a bounty beyond basic/defeatable script attacks.

Instead of a defeatist attitude why not just solve the issues, they're not that hard.
by ysnp | 2025-07-27 08:06:55+00:00
>About the OEM, are you working on having devices ship with GrapheneOS, or devices be GOS compatible (i.e. same as the Pixels)?

As far as I'm aware as an outsider, the aim is a device that is compatible with GrapheneOS like the Pixels, yes.

>If you're thinking of devices shipping with it, would this fix the issue of Play Integrity/SafetyNet failing?

I think to pass this you need to be 'blessed by Google' which means being certified Android by their standards. GrapheneOS have mentioned that their CTS/CDD Android certification process holds back some of the privacy/security features (think things like new Sensors and Internet permissions etc.) implemented so they cannot can't target it.
by baq | 2025-07-27 08:07:17+00:00
Maybe useful for VCs who have a portfolio of companies and need to put stuff in their presentations to LPs.

If you’re an employee you can’t look at this like an investor would. Your risk profile is completely different. The write up is correct in that it’s basically a call option, correctly point out there is no market for it and then ignore the fact that zero liquidity means you can land a 747 between the bid and ask (if you get anyone to buy from you at all).

This a feel good number generator.
by quotemstr | 2025-07-27 08:09:04+00:00
Zig articles tend to get a little too excited about rediscovering longstanding techniques.

The author has described a metaprogramming utility for allocating a contiguous hunk of memory, carving this hunk into fields (in the article's example, a fixed-sized Client header, then some number of bytes for host, then some number of bytes for read_buffer, and then some for write_buffer). I'll acknowledge the syntax is convenient, but

1. we've done this since time immemorial in C. See https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/api/evntcons...

2. you can implement this pattern ergonomically in C++, and even moreso once the C++26 reflection stuff comes online

3. the zig implementation is inefficient. It desugars to

const Connection = struct { ptr: [*]u8, lens: struct { host: usize, read_buffer: usize, write_buffer: usize, } }

That first pointer is needless indirection and probably a cache miss. You should (unless you have specific performance data showing otherwise) store the sizes in the object header, not in an obese pointer to it. (It's bigger than even a fat pointer.)
by isodev | 2025-07-27 08:09:29+00:00
Just a wild guess: The connection is uncontrolled growth, where companies evolve from a normal business to a perpetual "increasing shareholder value" grift (think the Apples, Googles, Microsofts, Metas, (Space)Xs out there...). It happened when tech incorporated "the user" as a product (as opposed to tech working to actually solve problems and elevate the status quo).
by MoreQARespect | 2025-07-27 08:09:33+00:00
>The majority of folks are consumers and unable and/or unwilling to handle the complexity of self-hosting

The majority of folks just want to text and call on their phones. They are unwilling to handle the complexity of having an entire computer in their pocket. -- 2006

>There are no incentives for the major vendors to implement protocols that will threaten their massive advertising revenues.

Right. And Yahoo didnt want to be a search engine. They wanted to be the home page of the internet.
by dragonwriter | 2025-07-27 08:09:36+00:00
That's not really analogous to revenge porn laws (where the “revenege" part is both non-literal—the actual condition is lack of consent—and refers to a special circumstance that makes what is normally legal, illegal, not an enhanced penalty for existing offense.)

But if your proposed concept of “revenge libel” laws are just, as you say an added penalty for a subset of existing libel offenses, then while they might add more severe sanctions, they don't change the scope of what is prohibited, so they wouldn't change the calculus on whether anything is illegal.
by closewith | 2025-07-27 08:10:16+00:00
The rule of thumb is 1mL per Kg bodyweight, so a child can drown with less than 15mL of water in their lungs. The most common mechanisms are laryngospasm or contraction of the laryngeal muscles closing the airway (dry drowning) or pulmonary oedema caused by irritating of the alveoli (secondary drowning).
by harel | 2025-07-27 08:11:07+00:00
I did a fair bit of work in this world of self sovereign identity a couple years ago. We abandoned the project because we felt it won't get adoption. We also embedded a verifiable credentials in a CRM making it as a platform to manage VCs at scale and nobody cared. Most people don't care it seems. Or maybe it's just too future tech and we're not there yet.
Show HN: (Almost) instant NAICS, UNSPSC, HS code classification (free webapp)
by dmatv | 2025-07-27 08:11:36+00:00
I've made a very simple website that tells relevant categories (and their codes) from really any input text description. Categories are of some of the most widely-used industry classification standards like NAICS and UNSPSC How does it work? On the backend, it creates multi-hundred dimension vectors (essentially numbers) and compares those vectors with a vector of each category in said standard. Closes are the most relevant semantically - closest to each other in meaning.

As a result, you get instantly what could have taken hours for a single product - searching a relevant category manually. Of course, it can make mistakes i.e. the top result is quite often not the best, but because it shows Top 5, Top 10 or even Top 100 categories if you wish, it is still much easier to find the correct category. And, perhaps more importantly, you can be certain that you didn't miss anything in a classification of 1000s of classes and subclasses.
by ryandamm | 2025-07-27 08:12:13+00:00
Do you know that there is an actual voxel representation that exists before the self-driving AI? I was under the impression (from conversations with engineers who might know, admittedly) that there was not an explicit 3D representation that went into the self-driving module, and the AI was operating directly on pixels. I would be relieved to hear that there's an explicit 3D solve before that step... if accurate. Obviously there are 3D views on the dash, but my understanding is that is not an input to the full self driving solve. But again, it's hearsay (hence my question).
by everythingabili | 2025-07-27 08:12:45+00:00
30 years experience of coding and development with degree in Sculpture. After 4 or 5 years as an artist...

* Hypercard/Director/Photoshop based Multimedia

* AppleScript/Filemaker

* Web Development Prograph CPX / SQL Web Development

* Python/Zope/SQL/PHP Web Development

* Processing(Java)/P5js/GDevelop Edu/Games Development

* Python/AppleScript/Sheets/AI/Python
by retinaros | 2025-07-27 08:13:38+00:00
per your link. couldnt you entertain the possibility that those voices were silenced by left leaning twitter policies? they even admitted it. it appears now to this same leaning press that actually there are plenty of right wing voices in USA (like the ones that voted for trump). I am not sure what is the problem. just like and follow people of the left and the algorithm will adapt.
by izacus | 2025-07-27 08:13:41+00:00
No, please do obsses over this while designing. The amount of times I have to say "you can't fix these performance issues without rewriting majority of your software" is too damn high.

I mean, I make a lot of money as performance specialist, but it's still a dumb waste when you see failing products and companies because their rockstar developers refused to spend 30 minutes thinking about how well their architecture and code performs. You can't fix everything later.
by Mawr | 2025-07-27 08:15:02+00:00
> So in JVM boxing is really cheap, often just a pointer increment.

Nonsense. Sure, the act of creating a new allocation is cheap, but that's not where the expense lies at all. And of course, to make allocations cheap, you needed to give up something else.

Each allocation needs to be at some point handled by the GC, so the more allocations, the more GC pressure. That then forces you to make your GC generational, which constrains your GC design. You end up with a slower GC no matter what you do.

Moreover, every access to that allocation goes through a pointer, which is basically a guaranteed cache miss.

The classic case of this is iterating over an Array<Integer>. Not only did you have to make n allocations that the GC now has to keep track of, it's not possible to efficiently fetch items of this array from memory at all. You need to first fetch the pointers, then request the pointed to memory. Even in the best possible case of the pointer living right next to the data it points to, you're still paying the overhead of extra memory taking up space in your L1 cache.

Compare with an array of simple integers. Zero GC overhead, zero pointers, zero memory overhead, trivial to prefetch.

---

This is a case of horrid approach to design. Making allocating cheap must come at a cost of slowing down some other part of the GC and just encourages programmers to allocate more, which puts more and more pressure on the GC, making it even slower. It's a self-defeating approach that is therefore completely bone headed.

Allocations should be expensive!

With expensive allocations you get breathing room in your GC to make it otherwise faster. Moreover, since programmers are now encouraged not to allocate, the GC pressure is lower, making it even faster. But it gets even better. Optimizing becomes very clear and straightforward - just reduce allocations. This is great because it allows for targeted optimizations - if a particular piece of code is slow, just reduce its allocation rate and you'll get a nice speedup. Very easy to reason about.

That's why code written C/C++/Go/Rust tends to be so conscious of allocations and any indirections, but Java is full of linked lists, arrays of pointers, allocations everywhere and thousands of layers of indirections.

Cleaning up heaps of garbage can never be faster than not creating the garbage in the first place.
by brailsafe | 2025-07-27 08:15:53+00:00
I can see how I sound that way, but im saying so I think you're assuming more than you should. I meant more like going out on that first date, and then finding out she's a lesbian, but:

> That first date that probably won't be a second date is your chance to do your sales pitch.

Is the ideal case, and would be the nature of a good date if those were the parameters within which both parties agreed to go out, but if I was actually bitter about:

> "yeah I'll give it a try, I guess" instead of just saying "no"

I would think that would be a somewhat justified reason to be pissed, maybe, depending on how the circumstances came about and how frequently that occurs, because it's a failure of communication that's quite pervasive and imo insidious outside and inside dating. Conflict avoidance in general leads to ghosting, excessively specific expectations regardless of sex, ambiguity around consent, and not being able to say "no" is a bad thing.

> Overall, I think people are bitter that dating has such a low probability chance in providing the outcome they desire. But you have to know that going in; "you look good in these 3 pictures and I liked your witty quote" is not necessarily going to lead to a lifetime of happiness. You probably have to expect 1000 failures for every success.

This part I mostly agree with. It's at least an admirable level of pain tolerance and persistence that one would hope pays off eventually, as well as a good way to align yourself.

> But you only need one success.

If you get really lucky, one success, but let's be real, it's hard to nail it one go, let alone 2 or 3, so I disagree needing one success.

Ultimately I don't personally have any reason to be bitter, but I have a lot of early 30s single friends that just... aren't really having much luck for a variety of reasons, including those mentioned above. My friends of both genders, at this point in their life, seem to have a perfect image of what they'd want in a partner, or an accumulation of red flags that—some of which—would be relatively trivial to overcome if you had an established friendship prior. Reminds me of Seinfeld a bit, someone gets caught picking their nose and you can't recover.
by pi-err | 2025-07-27 08:16:21+00:00
You could swap "tech" for "big media" and just play the same blame game for Reagan's and Bush Jr's elections.

> the crown jewels of America’s last century

Including Nasa in this pure idealization of the past. Nasa had many flaws that enabled a catastrophic Shuttle program and then the slow loss of US go-to-LEO capability.

There's probably more to expect of US investment in space without incompetent or contradictory military and political oversight than the current nasa zombie programs.

And it's unclear that Nasa can ever be without that oversight.
by ineedaj0b | 2025-07-27 08:17:45+00:00
i too knew a lot of NASA employed peopled and it’s always regrettable to lose a job but.. what the heck was our space program doing? i know they blamed changing leadership and changing budget but the space shuttle’s replacement program was run horribly.

the only working part of cape canaveral was whatever spy satellites they needed to launch.

thankfully spaceX does a pretty good job and while I wish it was still nasa leading the globe in space travel, the main decline of our era is unwieldy bureaucracy and not even nasa could figure out how to run a profit despite a monopoly.
by derriz | 2025-07-27 08:18:34+00:00
I don't think this is true or at least is not reflected by any statistics.

Inequality, as measured by GINI has been falling both for the EU as a whole and within most European countries for decades now. The last decade in particular has seen declines in nearly all EU countries.

Taking the EU on average the last time it increased was in 2014 - which is to be expected as the 2013 expansion allowed a number of relatively poor countries into the union.

For individual countries, you can check the statistics here: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SI.POV.GINI

A few examples, I looked at Ireland in particular, and inequality has never been lower - the earliest statistics I could find is from the mid-1980s. Inequality peaked around 2000 for the UK and has declined hugely since then. France is more equal than it was in 2000 although the fall is less dramatic than that for the UK. Admittedly Germany has seen a slight rise since 2000 but Germany has also absorbed millions of very poor refugees in that time.

The US is an outlier globally - with rising inequality over the last few decades.

Slightly off-topic, this untrue claim of rising inequality in Europe is often presented without challenge and then used to justify some radical political solution. To my mind, it's using the same political "mind hack" that the the MAGA/alt-right in the USA have used (in this case concerning race, immigrants, global multilateralism, or social tolerance - "wokism" - in general).

For both, the veracity of the claims is apparently unimportant and uninteresting as long as the claim aligns with one's political orientation. The goal of these oft repeated untruths is to provoke indignation or anger - in order to drum up support for some radical political "solution".
by potamic | 2025-07-27 08:18:37+00:00
Most people own a home for living and purchase it maybe once in their life time. It's the wealthy that engage in speculation and use real estate as an investment vehicle. This kind of behaviour creates an artificial demand for the resource raising its value.

The 67% ownership is also the figure that stands today as a result of purchases going back many decades during better times. As the report shows, ownership has been reducing successively with each generation even as the dependency on mortgage has been increasing. The ease, if not ability, of owning a home is definitely going down.
by magicloop | 2025-07-27 08:19:41+00:00
The real game the current administration is playing is to land on Mars before their current term expires. This mirrors the political, prestige, and technology triumph of the Kennedy administration. This is why the BBB Bill refocussed on the Mars mission despite having cuts.

What is being cut is otherwise a symptom of the budget deficit (7%) and the fact that politically they cut areas where there are not republican votes, as politicians obviously try to maintain their voter base as a consideration in their decisions.

Note historically a criticism of the original lunar mission was that USA diverted funds from hospitals and other public programs to fund the mission. So some were bitter despite the triumph.

It goes back to the fundamental conundrum. You have a back of corn. Do you plant the corn, or eat the corn? If AI delivers for America (planting the corn) and USA lands on Mars, these 4k NASA employees will not dwell in the public imagination despite our respect for their commitment, skill and service.
by menaerus | 2025-07-27 08:20:21+00:00
Interesting design. 16 CCDs / 16 CCXs / 16 cores. 1 core per each CCD. 1 CCX per each CCD. With 512MB of L3 cache this CPU should be able to use ~all of its ~10 TB/s of L3 MBW out of the box.

How much is it going to cost you to build the box?
by cluckindan | 2025-07-27 08:21:49+00:00
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-19589-w

”we evaluated the full spectrum of nutrient intake and identified a significant positive correlation between ImP [imidazole propionate] and saturated fat intake (driven by high cheese intake)”

Perhaps this depends on the type of cheese consumed.

Of course, it’s a correlation; ImP could be modulating eating habits and making people prefer eating cheese.
by watwut | 2025-07-27 08:22:41+00:00
This has exactly zero with being left out of economic progress and wanting it. They literally vote for people who are leaving them outside of all subsequent economic progress. And that was also their voting record in the past. What they actually voted for was culture war - disgust with trans specifically and hate toward anything that can be casted as liberal which includes science. It was wish for Christian autocracy and enforcement of associated values.

The feel good explanations are just that - feel good euphemisms. Acting on them failed in the past repeatedly. Politicians who tried to improve situation of these people were punished, repeatedly. Meanwhile, politicians acting in offensive and harmful way were rewarding even when they made lifes of their voters worst.

We really should stop projecting these good faith falsehoods when the are and were clearly false.
by littlestymaar | 2025-07-27 08:22:49+00:00
This isn't shallow water by any means when kids are involved. There are routinely deadly accident where kids drawn in less than a foot of water (here[1] for example a 3yo in 23cm of water).

[1]: https://www.midilibre.fr/2022/08/01/un-enfant-de-3-ans-se-no...
by akkad33 | 2025-07-27 08:23:15+00:00
It sounds exactly the same as Python with pyright or mypy. A novel approach is taken by Elixir, which actually makes sure the compile time types match runtime types. That is , you can't call a function with an incorrect input type at runtime https://elixir-lang.org/blog/2023/09/20/strong-arrows-gradua...
by afandian | 2025-07-27 08:23:37+00:00
It really depends what you’re trying to do. Make something citable? Findable? Permalink?

Crossref isn’t the only DOI registration agency. DataCite may be more relevant, although both require membership. Part of this is the commitment to maintaining the content.

You could look at Figshare or Zenodo? https://docs.github.com/en/repositories/archiving-a-github-r...

Then Rogue Scholar is worth a mention. https://rogue-scholar.org/

Sorry that doesn’t answer your question but maybe that’s a clue that DOIs might not be right for your use case?
by poisonborz | 2025-07-27 08:24:45+00:00
> There are no incentives for the major vendors to implement protocols that will threaten their massive advertising revenues.

In 1996 there were especially no incentives from corporations for a free operating system to exists, yet Linux was born on the back of a few hard working engineers and the whole industry catched up, it created a lot (if not the majority) of business. You can engineer ~free and easy self-hosting.

I agree it needs to be personal, there are no appealing middle-man options.
by immibis | 2025-07-27 08:26:13+00:00
So basically how it is today with phone verification. There are websites where you can pay $5 to borrow a phone number to verify a particular service. Except you only get one at a time.

Your idea also amounts to preventing ban evasion by linking a government ID to each account, which is on of the criticisms of linking accounts to government ID. And preventing multiple accounts even when not used to ban-evade..

And are you going to give the government N^2 queries every day?
by BinaryIgor | 2025-07-27 08:27:29+00:00
I still struggle to see what exact problems Decentralized Identifiers solve and how exactly they would make the Internet better. Ommiting additional complexity they bring - where to store them, how to control them etc. - what new use cases they would allow? How would they solve some of the incentives problems on the Internet we currently have?

Having controlled by the user public-private key pair instead of multiple accounts on a variety of platforms doesn't bring self-sovereigninty by itself. Whatever you post/publish must also be discoverable by other people - and that's where we go back to centralized platforms/services of today.