MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by 57473m3n7Fur7h3 | 2025-07-13 11:40:23+00:00
I have nothing against VSCode but I don’t use it.

For small files and quick edits i use neovim with no customisation at all. Back when I first started using vim I had a pretty long config and some plugins installed and so on. But now that I no longer try to use it as an IDE, neovim is perfect for small edits.

For development work I use JetBrains suite of tools. Very minimal amount of customisation there also, only a couple of extra plugins installed by me and a couple of changes in the settings. It works well enough that I don’t have any desire to spend time customising it a whole bunch.
by timmg | 2025-07-13 11:42:36+00:00
I'm pretty intrigued by companies like Anduril. I don't know much about them. But the idea that we apply more "tech startup" business models to defense doesn't seem like a bad idea to me.

My sense is that the existing defense contractors are old, slow and expensive (and conditioned to take huge sums from the government for developing future tech.)

In fairness, I'm not at all knowledgable about the industry. Just my impression of things. But it is hard to not be happy to see new entrants to any important market.
by restalis | 2025-07-13 11:42:52+00:00
The main benefit for me with this approach is that the boundries are not transparent anymore. That content printing is such a boundry. Your data is about to exit through there and you're summoned to handle that. The inconvenience that comes with it is as any other when security enters the play. The same with the data management responsibilities - who handles what, for how long, and with whom. Without data type distinctions everything is (more or less) common, with vague or broadly defined ownership.
by skydhash | 2025-07-13 11:43:15+00:00
I'd waste time with tools. I have my vim config, my git config, my emacs config, my bash config,... that I copy over to any development environment I have. And every now and then, I go into the manual or other people config to check if there's any new trick I can apply.

Comfort is something invaluable when doing a task. I can accept discomfort when I'm in an unfamiliar environment, but not when it's going to be something I will be in for days.
by PaulRobinson | 2025-07-13 11:43:22+00:00
No, they can't. The legislation[0], does allow them to lend things out, but:

The Trustees of the British Museum may lend for public exhibition (whether in the United Kingdom or elsewhere) any object comprised in the collections of the Museum: Provided that in deciding whether or not to lend any such object, and in determining the time for which, and the conditions subject to which, any such object is to be lent, the Trustees shall have regard to the interests of students and other persons visiting the Museum, to the physical condition and degree of rarity of the object in question, and to any risks to which it is likely to be exposed.

Lending it indefinitely is not in the interests of students in the UK or other persons visiting the British Museum, and there are considerable risks of non-return. It would be considered a disposal. Disposals are not allowed apart from under certain conditions expressed in clause 5 of the Act.

Politics is focused on more important matters, but the law is the law. You're confusing party politics with legislation because the two are intertwined within the British constitution, but the Museum would be breaking the law and the entire directorate would be in a huge, huge amount of trouble if they just decided to ship the marbles off "on loan" any time soon without explicit changes in legislation.

[0] https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1963/24
by neomantra | 2025-07-13 11:43:31+00:00
It’s easy to focus on the reliable UDP protocol and the multicast support, but what’s important about Aeron is its system architecture. As noted elsewhere, it all combines together in “mechanical sympathy” and once you have that you can interconnect with high performance transports [1].

So you set up an Aeron Server on your machine. That handles all external network communication at the message layer (NAKs, etc). Every “Aeron Client” process communicates with that Server to stand up shared memory pipes. The messaging client solely deals with those pipes (cache efficient, etc). They subscribe to channels at host:port/topic but it is not direct network delivery to them (the client is transport agnostic, besides the subscription). The network service directs data to the clients shared memory queue.

Once they have that base networked-IPC setup, you can maximize performance with it using reliable UDP and fan out common data (eg marlet data) using multicast.

Then Aeron further adds Archiving (to persist) and Clustering (to scale late join / state replication) components. This stuff works well with kernel bypass :)

[1] It could work with RDMA as well, but the ticket regarding that was closed 8 years ago. Maybe if there was AI/GPU workload interest.
by rwmj | 2025-07-13 11:44:09+00:00
They're not a real corporation in the "making profit by shipping widgets" sense. They've been funded by a huge annual grant from Google. So none of the management understands in their bones how money is made or how money is necessary for a company to survive. They have never built a successful, profitable product.

Instead of play-acting as a corporation, they might have decided to become a non-profit software foundation, which would have been a very honourable thing to do. But they have not, for example, built up a huge war-chest in case the Google spigot ever stops. Instead senior management has frittered the money away on their own salaries and absurd money-losing projects and acquisitions.
by lapcat | 2025-07-13 11:44:11+00:00
After dragging their feet for literally years, Google finally implemented a specific userscripts API. However, the implementation was initially just statically declared rules like DeclarativeNetRequest, which sucked, and it also required that the user enable developer mode.

In Chrome 135, which is very recent—the public is currently on Chrome 138—Google added an execute() method to run an individual script. However, the API is not available from the extension content script, so if it needs to be triggered from the content script, you have to make an async call to the background script (or more accurately, the background service worker, which is a whole other nightmare of MV3). Moreover, the API accepts only a string for JS code or a filename; you still can't use a Function() constructor for example.

In Chrome 138, the current version, Google switched from developer mode to a dedicated userscripts permission toggle in the extension details, which is disabled by default. I think Google is still working on but has not finished a permissions request API. Remember this is almost SEVEN YEARS after Google first announced Manifest V3. The entire time, Google has been stalling, foot dragging, practically getting dragged kicking and screaming into doing the least possible work here.
by mlugg | 2025-07-13 11:44:19+00:00
> Well, no. In zig that's `const x = foo(io)`.

If `foo` needs to do IO, sure. Or, more typically (as I mentioned in a different comment), it's something like `const x = something.foo()`, and `foo` can get its `Io` instance from `something` (in the Zig compiler this would be a `Compilation` or a `Zcu` or a `Sema` or something like that).

> Using stackless coroutines and green threads results in a completely different codegen.

Sure, but that's abstracted away from you. To be clear, stackless coroutines are the only case where the codegen of callers is affected, which is why they require a language feature. Even if your application uses two `Io` implementations for some reason, one of which is based on stackless coroutines, functions using the API are not duplicated.

> I wonder what will happen if you try to await a future created with a green thread IO using a stackless coroutine IO.

Mixing futures from any two different `Io` implementations will typically result in Illegal Behavior -- just like passing a pointer allocated with one `Allocator` into the `free` of a different `Allocator` does. This really isn't a problem. Even with allocators, it's pretty rare for people to mess this up, and with allocators you often do have multiple of them available in one place (e.g. a gpa and an arena). In contrast, it will be extraordinarily rare to have more than one `Io` lying around. Even if you do mess it up, the IB will probably just trip a safety check, so it shouldn't take you too long to realise what you've done.
by WJW | 2025-07-13 11:44:43+00:00
In the Ukraine war big troop concentrations have become almost impossible because the thousands of spotter drones in the air at any moment will spot them almost immediately, and provide accurate targeting information to (rocket) artillery within seconds.

FPV drones with a hand grenade strapped to them will finish off any stragglers. Bigger version (with more explosives) also apparently quite effective against armored vehicles like IFVs and tanks, and can be used to deploy new minefields without having to risk soldiers out in the open.

So perhaps they are not (yet) key to winning a war, but they are certainly already key to not losing. There's a very good reason Ukraine is ramping up drone production to several million per year. Convert that to drones deployed per day and use your imagination to come up with uses for 30000 kamikaze drones per day.
by lmz | 2025-07-13 11:45:11+00:00
> It has to be for it to compile, right? Which means that email_t is the type which represents both valid and invalid emails. How do you know if it's valid? You remember to write a check for it. Why not just save yourself some keystrokes and use char* instead. This is validate, not parse.

I feel this kind of fundamentalism is letting the perfect be the enemy of the good.
by tetha | 2025-07-13 11:45:15+00:00
I was curious how this would look in C, and I found this article[1] how this could look in C, apparently with very little overhead.

And as I just saw, Python 3.10 also introduced a NewType[2] wrapper. I'll have to see how that feels to handle.

1: https://blog.nelhage.com/2010/10/using-haskells-newtype-in-c...

2: https://typing.python.org/en/latest/spec/aliases.html#newtyp...
by bluelightning2k | 2025-07-13 11:45:28+00:00
It's a staggeringly bad deal. It's a hugely expensive task where unless you are the literal best in the world, you would never even see any usage. And even for those who are BOTH best and well known they have to be willing to lose billions on repeat with no end in sight.

It's very very rare to have winner takes all to such an extreme degree as code llm models
by PaulRobinson | 2025-07-13 11:45:53+00:00
That would be a disposal and requires an amendment to the law (specifically the British Museum Act 1963, which I've quoted in a reply to another comment in this thread).

"Everyone involved understands" is not sufficient guarantee to either the Museum or the Greek authorities that the law has been changed. It either must be a temporary loan - and ideally with artefacts of similar value being lent the other way to make clear that the loan is "de-risked" - or it can't happen.

I can't see that change in law happening any time soon.
by tomhow | 2025-07-13 11:46:10+00:00
Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, brigading, foreign agents, and the like. It degrades discussion and is usually mistaken. If you're worried about abuse, email hn@ycombinator.com and we'll look at the data.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
by gsf_emergency_2 | 2025-07-13 11:46:52+00:00
Ah..

Japanese media in general has poorer "production values", but they work very hard to draw (as accurately as possible) from global source, that's reflected in their mind boggling diversity. The less strange stuff get to inspire American versions.

It also seems that you have not asked any LLMs before posting this..

GTA "equivalent": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yakuza_(franchise)
by saturneria | 2025-07-13 11:47:08+00:00
In the 70s/80s, the jobs that were available to you were basically what your family member could "get you in". I am of that age and I remember General Motors was a great place to work at that time. My friend "got in" after high school because his father was a union boss. For me, "getting in" to General Motors was literally impossible because I had no connections.

I was into 90s cyberpunk and the problem was the ideas were basically all wrong about the internet. Or maybe we could have gone in another direction with the internet but didn't.

The main difference overall though is in the past life was incredibly boring. It was so boring people had to invent all these cultural activities to escape the disconnected, mind numbing boredom of existence.

Life today is just much more interesting regardless of finances so there isn't the motivation to hang out at goth bar once a week.
by anovikov | 2025-07-13 11:47:09+00:00
I think it's because of the tasks they did. For run of the mill custom development projects AI certainly speeds things up a great lot. But when i tried to use it for comparatively hard tasks, i found it easier to do things by myself. It was nothing too fancy, just bitwise image manipulation - a custom code for pixel format conversion combined with image resizing that had to work a lot faster than ffmpeg's, but in a narrow set of conditions - no miracles here, it's not at all smarter than ffmpeg's, just specialised. 100% hand-made code took less time to build and was just as fast to execute. Of course, it used intrinsics.
by DragonStrength | 2025-07-13 11:47:15+00:00
There's no reason to assume our current pursuit is not a dead end for any number of reasons we do not yet understand. There is a lot of faith we are capturing the same thing based on perceptions, which have a lot to do with the individual observer. It seems very important to some folks that our natural process is a mirror of what our technology does. The same result does not mean it is the same process or anything other than a mirage -- though one that may trick a lot of us.

Every generation tries to map its most complex technology onto its understanding of nature. "AGI" has a specific meaning today, but if you want it to mean atheism versus theism or whatever materialist argument, you're far outside of science and technology. Like our fathers of the Enlightenment with their watchmaker god. The idea there is some way for humans to break free of nature seems like a religious belief to me, but whether you agree or not, certainly there is room for doubting that faith, since we're outside the realm of what science can explore.
by liveoneggs | 2025-07-13 11:47:25+00:00
One time I was setting up a jboss cluster on vmware boxes - two right next to each other in the rack. JBoss used (uses?) multicast discovery to find the cluster and the VMs on different boxes just couldn't find each other.

Another time I had a backup job using uftp (a multicast file xfer tool) and it was a similar story. Systems literally sitting one rack over couldn't talk.

We involved all of our CC*-certified guys, wasted a week, and eventually just used the explicit command line switches to configure the cluster.

The hardware is not up to the task, physical or virtual, as far as I can tell.
by Eddy_Viscosity2 | 2025-07-13 11:50:38+00:00
> Human intelligence is not general intelligence. If it were, you'd be able to use your conscious thoughts to fight off diseases and you wouldn't need your immune system, for example.

The above is nonsense. Mostly because we actually do use our conscious thoughts to fight disease when our immune system can't. That's what medical science is for. We used our intelligence to figure out antibiotics, for example.

The broadly accepted meaning of AGI is human intelligence on a machine. Redefining it to mean something else does nothing useful.
by dcchambers | 2025-07-13 11:51:47+00:00
AI helps write the code but it doesn't help with the "process" large engineering orgs and stuck in.

I think that's why we see small teams and indie hackers really utilize it. They aren't bogged down by the beauracracy of code changed in a large org.

Big tech is looking for a miracle cure without looking at the root problem (too much process, overhead, cruft). Current AI tools are also far less useful in large codebases than they are in greenfield projects.
by ericpauley | 2025-07-13 11:51:50+00:00
Completely agree. For all the hate Mozilla gets on HN, I’ve been using Firefox every day for a decade and it pretty much just works, supports a rich collection of (vetted!) extensions, and performs exceptionally well with sometimes hundreds of tabs.

Mozilla makes mistakes just like any organization but they’ve done and continue to do more for an open Internet than most.
by FpUser | 2025-07-13 11:52:36+00:00
Not sure about winning but drones are the major factor in Ukrainian war. Style of warfare did change completely. You should probably listen to interviews with the soldiers on both sides. An eye opener.

As for attacking civilians being the goal:

[1] - "At least two people were killed, including a 22-year-old police officer who was named by authorities as Maria Dziumaha, and more than a dozen were wounded in the attacks, according to authorities..."

That is after more than 400 drones were used in the attack.

[1] - https://www.cnn.com/2025/07/09/europe/russia-air-assault-ukr...
by arp242 | 2025-07-13 11:52:47+00:00
Many people on HN hold Mozilla to impossible and conflicting standards. It is simultaneously a compromised propaganda arm of Google for taking the Google bribe, while also being compromised money-grabbing wankers diluting their mission when they try to generate alternative revenues of income. I realise that HN has different people posting different arguments, but I've seen many people post both over the years.

All of that is frequently married with an the amount of vitriol that seems out of place and downright bizarre. There is typically a lack of constructive discourse or suggestions, beyond vague hand-waving about how they should "just do better", or "just do this or that". Well, if it's that easy then why don't you start a browser?

In-between all of that there is the inevitable political vitriol and flaming about Mozilla. Have we gotten a flamewar about Brendan Eich (who left over 11 years ago) yet? It's the Godwin Law of Mozilla/Firefox.

These threads bring out the absolute worst of the site and many people with more nuanced views probably make a habit of staying out of them. When I've commented on this before I've been accosted with highly aggressive personal attacks. So now I often just hide them.
by tomComb | 2025-07-13 11:53:13+00:00
If not now, soon.

The US is making a big mistake giving up on the EV chain. In doing so it is ceding drones and robots, which are key to future wars and economies.

The countries that it is currently waging economic war against should instead be engaged in creating an alternative to the Chinese supply chain. For example, it is currently disassembling the automotive supply chain that included Canada and low-cost Mexico, but it should be doubling down on that.
by specialist | 2025-07-13 11:53:34+00:00
You prompted me to learn something about USAID. Thank you.

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

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

I've always kind of assumed the USA's hegemonic "soft power" (Peace Corps, USAID) was an outgrowth of Civil Affairs Units.

Likewise, I assume the USA's chaotic, neurotic policies are the result of the never-ending food fight between liberals and reactionaries. Reflected in the tortured history of USA's domestic policy making wrt foreign policy. Carrots vs sticks.

Regardless, hegemony is not great. Will a multi-polar world be better (overall)?

Insofar as "soft power" prevents the greater evil of war, I'm all for it. (Per the cliché "war is the failure of diplomacy".) Obviously, reactionary tantrums (neocons, GWOT, Second Gulf War w/ Iraq, total failure in Afghanistan, etc, etc) are complete failures.

Further, I am skeptical that any "soft power" can be more moral than not (on the balance). I acknowledge that the USA (and friends) have managed to pull off a few win/win scenarios, like PERPAR.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President%27s_Emergency_Plan_f...

For future, I'm for whatever reforms or innovations or governance or moral progress or whatever which supplants hegemony with something better. The prospect of Pax Sinica, Pax Europa, Pax Indica, or whomever, is no more desirable than (our now waning) Pax Americana.
2039.js – The web framework that runs in the future (literally)
by gaeguldev | 2025-07-13 11:53:57+00:00
Everything works. You just can’t see it. You came too early. It is running. It is just running in 2039.

2039.js is a fully quantum-aligned, emotion-routed, consciousness-synced web framework designed for realities not yet accessible in your temporal dimension.

It introduces bleeding-edge technologies such as:

- `useBrainWaveSync()` – hooks into your local consciousness stream - `syncReality()` – syncs with multiversal device IDs - `<ZalgoButton>` – renders emotional chaos in stable mode - `main.2040.ql` – entrypoint written in QuantumLang (QL), not Legacy JavaScript

Everything seems to work perfectly. Logs are clean. Entropy is stable. You just can't interact with it… yet.

Source: [https://github.com/Mjkim-Programming/2039.js]

This framework is not broken. Your perception just hasn't caught up.

Edit: This is just for fun! I just made this thing literally an hour ago and if you want to add some more blending-edge technology to it, pelase contribute to.. this messy code! Have Fun!
by DangerousPie | 2025-07-13 11:54:22+00:00
Or in slightly less fatalistic words: In any entity with more than 1-2 employees you need someone to make decisions and be accountable for them. The normal solution is to have a director/CEO for this. You may be able to get away with paying them slightly less than market rates if they are doing it for a good cause, but if you want someone competent you will need to pay them a relatively high salary to compete with other employers.

Expecting Mozilla to somehow function without a CEO, unlike pretty much every other charity in the world, is just not reasonable.
by ndriscoll | 2025-07-13 11:54:48+00:00
That's still not giving a concrete reason. Why would I need to access gigabyte.com? I can't even buy their products there; I'd have to buy them on something like Amazon. Firmware updates? If it works I'm not going to change it. If it doesn't, I'm going to return it. If products try to reach out to their manufacturers on their own that's twice the reason to default block as much as you can.
by delusional | 2025-07-13 11:54:50+00:00
> Bigger version (with more explosives) also apparently quite effective against armored vehicles like IFVs and tanks

At that point it seems like it's basically a very slow moving missile, except it's steerable by a human operator.

I was under the impression that the value of these weapons was mostly in their simple construction from readily available parts (cheap ammunition and grenades instead of expensive purpose made javelins). Doesn't that kind of go away if you start to "innovate" with them?

If Lockheed Martin starts selling the drones at $30k a pop, I don't understand why they'd be better than a missile.
by Almondsetat | 2025-07-13 11:56:46+00:00
Nobody would like these kinds of games just like nobody has ever liked "educational" games.

Why?

Because they try too hard, since their main objective is not to be a good game.

It's like reading a novel and immediately noticing the story is just some thinly veiled bullshit so that the author can vomit their own personal view of the world. It makes you lose interest real fast.