MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by atmavatar | 2025-07-13 18:12:41+00:00
If they're already vetting your social media, they can also start refusing service based upon religious or political leanings displayed in your posts. No slope (slippery or otherwise) is required.

Imagine making reservations for a family dinner but being turned away at the door because the restaurant found a post (in support/critical) of Trump or one of his policies. The restaurant would be completely within its rights to do so, even if it seems a stupid and pointless business decision to cut clientele in half.
by KineticLensman | 2025-07-13 18:12:46+00:00
Clarke's original prediction, in a 1945 letter to Wireless World, is as follows:

>> An "artificial satellite" at the correct distance from the earth would make one revolution every 24 hours; i.e., it would remain stationary above the same spot and would be within optical range of nearly half the earth's surface.

>> Three repeater stations, 120 degrees apart in the correct orbit, could give television and microwave coverage to the entire planet. I'm afraid this isn't going to be of the slightest use to our post-war planners.

His short story The Sentinel, the precursor to 2001 A Space Odyssey, also has, IIRC, a description of the crew of a lunar rover frying sausages on a hob during one of their missions. And The Deep Range posits mass farming of whales to feed one eighth of the world population. I loved his fiction as a kid but the predictions haven't aged well.
by PaulHoule | 2025-07-13 18:13:47+00:00
Worse than that, where I work I can only install an LTS Firefox so I am stuck with relatively old features, but, hey, I’m in React land using components with some time lag in their development that don’t use these new features. I was kinda shocked to see that mainstream toolkits aren’t using <dialog/> given that it is a huge leap forward for accessibility… screen readers do not see anything they’re not supposed to see, end of story. Trouble is that it does cause trouble for frameworks that depend heavily on portalization.
by kelnos | 2025-07-13 18:13:53+00:00
I don't hate Firefox. It is my daily driver. I hate that Firefox went from the dominant browser by market share, to the minor, insignificant player it is today.

I hate that Firefox is so irrelevant that most web devs don't test on it. For many sites that's fine, because web standards are web standards, and Firefox supports them quite well. But whenever I run across a broken site, or even one that mostly works, but gives me papercuts, and then fire up Chrome and see that it works fine there, a little bit of me cries inside.

Mozilla should be focusing a lot more on user acquisition, and on figuring out why so many of their users have left.
by cryptonector | 2025-07-13 18:14:50+00:00
> While I'm here I'll ask: does anybody have a recommendation for resources on learning lisp that focus on how the interpreter/compiler works?

Yes: Lisp in Small Pieces, by Christian Queinnec.

I've read a fair number of books on Lisp, including Paul Graham's On Lisp and ANSI Common Lisp, and IMO Lisp in Small Pieces is the best for understanding how to implement a Lisp. LiSP covers interpreters and compilers, and it covers how to implement call/cc. Like Paul Graham's books on Lisp, LiSP is highly enjoyable -- these are books I read for fun.
by __MatrixMan__ | 2025-07-13 18:15:12+00:00
Yeah good point. With large enough pixels and pathological color choices you could almost certainly derive the opposite result.

It would be interesting to test it over a remote desktop session where the screen on the device under test is off. That would eliminate a lot of factors related to the display. Presumably you'd see that the network traffic is either larger to begin with, or doesn't compress quite as well, giving you another reason to say "yes, but what if..."
by Alex-Programs | 2025-07-13 18:16:14+00:00
This is really cool!

I've done a lot of research into LLM translation for my product[0], and I'm currently working on a deep translation service that provides reliably human-level translations.

I don't know what model you're using, but GPT-4.1 is probably the best for your use case - it's in the top few % for nearly every language, and has a low standard deviation, while also being relatively low latency and low cost.

[0] https://nuenki.app
by azbyte | 2025-07-13 18:16:17+00:00
Hey! The name of your project caught my eye, as I'm behind https://secutils.dev, so I had to check it out and say hi to a fellow dev in the security tools space :)

Looks like the home page is empty right now, which might be a bit confusing for visitors. I wonder if it'd make sense to set https://secutils.com/vm/vulnerabilities as the default page until there's something else useful enough to show on the home page.

> So far I'm using it to monitor vulnerabilities for a few key products

I'm curious how you actually monitor them - do you just visit the page periodically, or is there some automatic tracking capability I missed?
by thrwyexecbrain | 2025-07-13 18:16:23+00:00
I miss the mention of boost::asio in this thread. At first glance this new Io interface feels not that dissimilar to it:

Both are generic interfaces over an event loop/executor supporting async or blocking operations. Both ship a thread-pool and a stackful coroutine backend and both can be used through their respective language's stackless coroutine implementation (co_yield in cpp and yet-unimplemented in zig).
by hughesjj | 2025-07-13 18:18:19+00:00
I mean, already at the local cop level "forgetting" to turn the body cam on or only releasing the video (at least, quickly) if it puts the officer in a positive light seems to be the norm

* https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/officers-body-camera-wen...

* https://www.nbcmiami.com/investigations/body-cameras-turned-...

* UK but it's the same discussion https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-66809642

* https://www.wbrc.com/2025/07/12/coroner-completes-report-jab...

* https://ktla.com/news/nationworld/release-of-police-bodycam-...
by sethev | 2025-07-13 18:18:59+00:00
A c5.9xlarge instance has 12 gigabits/s of bandwidth available [1]. A fair comparison to TCP would need to look at end to end message delivery, including framing / parsing of the messages.

On the face of it, the ability to use the majority of the bandwidth of the instance with small messages is impressive.

[1] https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AWSEC2/latest/UserGuide/ec2-inst...
by PaulHoule | 2025-07-13 18:19:16+00:00
I’m used to this behavior in Microsoft Land. OneNote was pretty good but I’m sure they killed it by putting three icons for it on the taskbar and making the ‘print’ dialog print everything to OneNote if you didn’t quadruple-check what you were printing to. I liked the local XML files cause I could write scripts that extracted stuff from them. Then they killed it for me by making it cloud only. Then they just killed it.

OneDrive was dead to me in the first week because (a) it was the default save location for Office and (b) if it was broken I could not save at all. That’s how to be sure somebody never uses a product ever again! It’s shocking to see how vertical integration can so utterly fail —- DropBox can make a product that doesn’t fail catastrophically on a large number of platforms, kernel integration and all dooms Microsoft’s product on their core platform.
by cryptonector | 2025-07-13 18:20:06+00:00
These are very good notes. Here's a few of my notes on these notes:

> Naming: Like Unix, Graham likes short names, often to the point of crypticness. See my notes on naming for a better way.

Eh, you should see Haskell, where conventions are to use `x` for an object of some type and `xs` for a list of `x`, for example. And not just x/xs, but h/hs, etc. Once you get used to thinking of polymorphic functions as mathematical functions then this starts seeming ideal rather than cryptic.

> Loops: Graham avoids loop, because it is so easily misused and different from the functional programming style. Sometimes, however, loop is the clearest simplest way to write something.

I agree, but this is probably didactic. Many Lisp teachers insist on students learning to think of recursion as a natural way to do iteration. I'm not sure I agree with that viewpoint, but I don't think it's unreasonable. The issue I have is that one really has to learn how to recognize tail recursion instantly, even mutual tail recursion, and then also how to recognize when non-tail recursion (especially mutual non-tail recursion) gets optimized by the compiler into a loop with an explicit stack (if at all).

> Preference for recursion over iteration, even if it might lead to code that causes stack overflows on very long lists.

Yes, well, see above. I agree that starting Lisp programmers will take some time to learn how to use tail recursion, but it's not a problem for a) an experienced Lisp programmer, b) a Lisp teacher who is trying to drive this point home.

> Backtraces are incredibly useful for debugging. Be aware though that tail-call elimination may have removed some function calls from the stack.

This is true in many languages. I've seen this in C. You have to get used to it because tail call optimization is so important.

> bfs is a terrible name, because it says how it works, not what it does.

Sometimes "how it works" has to bleed into the naming somehow. Generally (i.e., not just in Lisp) this function could be `search` (which is what TFA wants) in some namespace/package/whatever that where the function implements [part of] an interface and the provider's name denotes that this is a breadth-first search, but it's very important to understand the trade-offs of depth-first and breadth-first searching and which you get needs to be observable somewhere.
by bothangles | 2025-07-13 18:21:34+00:00
I've been exploring what a social network would feel like if it were completely offline and private by default.

BothAngles is my experiment in building a "sneaker net social network." The entire system is designed around user control and privacy.

The idea is simple:

Capture: You use a web-based tool to record a "holographic" video that captures video from your front and back cameras simultaneously.

Own & Share: Instead of uploading to the cloud, you save the creation as a local file. They are YOUR files. The app only opens them locally and never uploads anything. You have total control over whether you share them and who you share them with, person-to-person.

It's an attempt to make digital sharing a deliberate, private, and in-person act again.

The link is a demo of the camera technology. I'd love to get your feedback on the core concept. Is this level of privacy and control a compelling enough reason to use a more "inconvenient" network?

https://kody-w.github.io/localFirstTools/hologram-camera-rec...
by rahimnathwani | 2025-07-13 18:21:58+00:00
Years ago I had an LG 32" wide-screen CRT TV. I chose that model because it had a VGA port. It advertised a resolution of 640x480.

I was thrilled when my computer let me choose a resolution of 848x480, and it worked perfectly.

Back in those days, the web was usable at that resolution.
by kelnos | 2025-07-13 18:21:59+00:00
You seem to be really keen on whining about how people here hate on Mozilla, but seem not to be interested in arguing the merits of Mozilla and its actions over the years, and whether or not they deserve that hate.

So basically, you're a part of the problem you're complaining about. You're just being the contrarian looking down on the rest of us for having an opinion.

Tell me, why shouldn't we criticize Mozilla? What wonderful things have they done over the past several years? How does their behavior and performance make Firefox's cratered market share understandable and ok and reasonable? How is their failure to find alternative revenue streams, over and over again, ok and reasonable?

Many people in these threads are listing concrete evidence of Mozilla's poor behavior and performance, and you're just continuing, over and over, to whine about some sort of circlejerk you've imagined up. Either actually argue a useful point about Mozilla itself, or just stop posting about this.
by vjvjvjvjghv | 2025-07-13 18:23:04+00:00
I don't believe either that they focused too much on trans rights. But they don't have a clear focus on anything so they are easy to attack on minor issues like trans rights (yes, it's a minor issue only a very small part of the population cares about). And they constantly fall for the bait. They should run on something like Medicare For All and stick to it. Seems whenever they face some resistance they drop the issue.
by saltcured | 2025-07-13 18:23:24+00:00
It's funny, I think the second one is easier to parse. I loved Neuromancer when it got shoved in my face in 1992.

I don't understand how people can find Gibson hard to read. I somehow lump him together with Hemingway. He may use more punctuation, but his phrases are bite size and flowing.

I see the influence of beat poets. His prose isn't a paragraph long sentence to parse into some giant syntax tree. It's a stream of fragments, most of which are shallow simile. But they imply a larger metaphor as they settle into the mind and fade out.

(Edit: I mean, yes, they are sometimes a paragraph long sentence. But they don't require such careful parsing to understand. Now Stephenson on the other hand...)
by int0x29 | 2025-07-13 18:23:50+00:00
I've grown very tired of all the whining about the Mozilla Corporation. The browser, MDN, and certificate trust auditing work need more money than the foundation is getting. Making the browser paid for would kill it. This means that they need to find another way to pay the bills.

People whined about search licensing and it now seems there is a court order imminently about to kill those deals. That leaves either running other services or putting ads in the browser both of which attracted much complaining.

And no, forking is not the answer. Mozilla does the lion's share of security work and maintenance. If the mother ship dies the forks will slowly wither and die as they don't have the funding to replace Mozilla. If Mozilla can't make the numbers work a fragmented mess of forks will not do better. A few of these forks have made the problem worse for themselves by insisting on bringing back and maintaining the exploit ridden mess that was XUL based add ons.
by hughesjj | 2025-07-13 18:25:03+00:00
Also a lot of value add comes from corporations which produce things of complexity greater than the sum of their constituent parts.

If you already have a platform in use by the entire world, that matter of scale makes it much easier to find value adds more than a sole proprietor could ever dream of.

It's for these reasons I'm wary of talking about "value add" only being from the developers directly implementing a feature. Without support, IT, security, Product, HR, etc, I could not deliver that value add.
by ufmace | 2025-07-13 18:25:08+00:00
It's the most real example anyone's provided so far.

I tested it on both regular Chrome with UBO Lite and Firefix with stock full UBO, and both show ads on Twitch. I haven't looked into how to actually block them, but I'll take your word that that's the only way to do it in both cases.

It seems to me, both cases require some extra action to block ads. Full requires you to dig up a userscript and how to load it into UBO, while Lite requires you to find and install a whole extra extensions. Doesn't seem like that huge of a difference to me. I suppose some may disagree, but it's not at all hitting my bar for declarations others have made like that Lite is inadequate or Google is terrible for disabling Manifest V2.
by jfengel | 2025-07-13 18:25:20+00:00
I am manifestly certain it won't happen to me. I tick just about every box: straight, white, male, native-born US, healthy, moderately well off.

But I see it happening to others and that makes me upset. And my intention to fight that might some day make me a target, but that's not the core of it. The core is that it shouldn't happen to anyone.
by ansc | 2025-07-13 18:26:52+00:00
My bad, I should have written in my experience working on larger codebases. It was a bit too general. It was never about the semantics about the language, but about allowing developers to make the correct choice. Kind of why Golang was built for Google I guess. In practice I've found Golang developers to handle errors where appropriate, where in (binary) Rust applications I've usually found `anyhow` everywhere with `?` to be a bit of a silent issue.

You're right that the languages have the same capability. The terseness can IMO both be a strength and a liability.
by kelnos | 2025-07-13 18:27:30+00:00
Charitably, I'd like to believe that all these side quests were in search of actual, real, substantial, alternative revenue streams, in order to reduce dependency on Google.

The problem, of course, is that all of these side projects just flat out failed. Maybe they were self-indulgence projects or maybe they were pursued in earnest, but either way, they failed.
by 827a | 2025-07-13 18:28:35+00:00
But isn't harm minimization a thing? That's something we practice in other domains, like providing clean needles to drug addicts. After all, if drug use is harmful to the people doing drugs, then it should be illegal. So; making things illegal often doesn't solve the problem. Making it harder to consume porn reduces consumption which reduces the amount of money being funneled into the industry, which might be beneficial to those harmed by it (both producers and consumers). Versus, making it illegal might have a prohibition-style impact, and is, of course, legally tenuous anyway.
by pavel_lishin | 2025-07-13 18:28:38+00:00
> In a follow-up post Tuesday morning, the department denied that AI had been used to generate the photo, saying the packaging may depict words in “gibberish” because the drugs are illicit.

> “The packaging is most likely foreign, and it is possible that whoever made the packaging used AI to make a clearly knock-off package,” the post read.

Ah, cool, so they went into defense mode, saying whatever would get them off the hook, without actually verifying anything. I think when regular people do that, we call them compulsive liars, or narcissists, and tend to distrust them.
by qingcharles | 2025-07-13 18:29:04+00:00
Here's the thing. I've read thousands of police reports. Most police reports are super short and super vague. Most police reports are never read even once, even though a large percentage result in convictions. Most criminal charges result in plea deals. Most defendants will never see any evidence against them before pleading guilty†.

If, in the exceptionally rare case that a defendant goes to trial, an officer has to testify, it is probably on average a year after he wrote the report. He will be sat down just before trial by the prosecutor and shown his report and asked to read it. On the stand he generally will not have his report available to reference and is supposed to use his memory, but this will be corrupted by his reading of whatever is in the report he read a couple of hours before. If his report is full of inaccuracies he will almost certainly testify under oath to those.

†This situation has changed very slightly in the last few years with lawyers now supposed to verify the probable guilt of their client before recommending a guilty plea.
by copypaper | 2025-07-13 18:29:08+00:00
Yea I don't understand how people are "leaving it running overnight" to successfully implement features. There just seems to be a large disconnect between people who are all in on AI development and those who aren't. I have a suspicion that the former are using Python/JS and the features they are implementing are simple CRUD APIs while the latter are using more than simple systems/languages.

I think the problem is that despite feeding it all the context and having all the right MCPs agents hooked up, is that there isn't a human-in-loop. So it will just reason against itself causing these laughable stupid decisions. For simple boilerplate tasks this isn't a problem. But as soon as the scope is outside of a CRUD/boilerplate problem, the whole thing crumbles.
by rorylaitila | 2025-07-13 18:29:52+00:00
While this is the style I do in all of my (web) applications, it took a while to build my framework/tooling that overcomes the boilerplate to parse all incoming data into value objects. In a typical application of mine, there is usually well over dozens of entities and hundreds to thousands of fields. Creating value objects manually for all stringly types and numeric fields is a lot of work. Most value objects are some simple validation like limit to 255 characters or ints of some range.

I solve for this by using reflection and auto generating all value objects (inheriting by default from base types) and auto generating all accessor/controller classes or methods into the domain model. Therefore I model in base types, override the generated value object constructors for validation (if required), and all of the boundaries are using value objects. The internal code generally works with the underlying base types, because boxing/unboxing the value objects can be non-negligible performance impact when serializing a lot of data (which tends to be common in web applications... SQL > JSON > HTML).

I'm a huge fan, but I think ymmv. Web applications tend to have a wide interface (much of the domain model is user accessible). I think it's ideal for this case because of the number of fields a user can ultimately set and reused across many places.
by stefan_ | 2025-07-13 18:31:29+00:00
It's bizarre. In Japan, the custom is to revere your elders, in the US its apparently whoever is titled "leader". All of HN shivers in exaltation at the mention of the word.

The reality is that Firefox would have done much better had Mozilla fired their CEO 15 years ago and never hired another one. All of them executed significantly worse than mere government bonds did.
by layer8 | 2025-07-13 18:31:31+00:00
The phosphor still drops off very quickly [0][1][2], roughly within a millisecond. That’s why you would need a 1000 Hz LCD/OLED screen with really high brightness (and strobing logic) to approximate CRT motion clarity. On a traditional NTSC/PAL CRT, 1 ms is just under 16 lines, but the latest line is already much brighter than the rest. The slow-motion recording showing roughly one line at a time therefore seems accurate.

[0] https://blurbusters.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/crt-phosp...

[1] https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Phosphor-persistence-of-...

[2] https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Stimulus-succession-on-C...
by jfengel | 2025-07-13 18:32:14+00:00
"it felt like what people say they feel when they feel God’s love"

That's what the headline reminded me of. And I'll admit I don't understand that, either. I'd rather have the love of a chatbot, who will at least hold a conversation with me. Even if it can't do most of the other things I want from a life partner.

I know people enjoy unconditional love, but I would rather earn it at least a little. Without that it feels a bit hollow, because it's not really about me at all.

I intend no shade by that. I am happy for those who feel the love of a deity, so long as they follow that deity's injunction to be kind to people. It's just not for me; I'm kind to people for different reasons. And I'm similarly fine with someone loving and being loved by a bot.
by Jach | 2025-07-13 18:32:44+00:00
It can be tricky to narrow down definitions but there are at least a million and probably less than 5 million software developers in the US. The last few years have seen ~100k students graduate with CS degrees each year. Thousands of layoffs over the timespan of years isn't going to impact it all that much. If you played your cards right you could get a $100k+ starting salary at a BigCo (not necessarily a FAANG) 10 years ago, I only expect that to have expanded, and anyone with a handful of years of experience is going to be above that and should consider shopping around for >$150k if they aren't there already.