MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by ignoramous | 2025-07-11 11:12:58+00:00
Extending the Interior Design metaphor, the context of what's being designed and for who, that is, the doc archetype (manual, tutorial/guide, reference, recipies/demos/samples, audience-specific), is the first important part to get right.

https://github.com/google/opendocs/tree/main/project_archety...

> technical documents I aim to avoid anything in them which would detract from providing information as effectively and unemotionally

why do people read docs ... because they want to achieve something ... you need to work out what problem your reader is trying to solve. If Dusty wants to put their degree up on the wall, they might want to consult some documentation about how to do it. The documentation Dusty needs to do this would probably not be called "How to Choose a Drill". The documentation Dusty needs is "How to Hang a Picture".

https://www.thegooddocsproject.dev/tactic/ia-guide / https://archive.vn/rgt4Y
by DonHopkins | 2025-07-11 11:13:12+00:00
Of course I know of Charles Moore (just not personally), and have deeply studied and benefited from his work since I was a teenager, and I've written many many Forth and English words in and about his language.

He already exists as a simulated in LLOOOOMM:

https://github.com/SimHacker/lloooomm/blob/main/00-Character...

I've never met him myself, but I know people who've worked with Charles Moore directly on really interesting historic pioneering projects, and I've shared their story on Hacker News before:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29261868

>Coco Conn and Paul Rother wrote this up about what they did with FORTH at HOMER & Assoc, who made some really classic music videos including Atomic Dog, and hired Charles Moore himself! Here's what Coco Conn posted about it, and some discussion and links about it that I'm including with her permission: [...]

The rest of those people I've never heard of, but what does that prove? The real question is why do you brag about not having ever heard of people in order to support your point? What kind of a point is that, which you can only support by embodying or feigning ignorance? That's like Argument from Lack of Education. You can just google those people or ask an LLM to find out who they are. Why the obsession with "Without Googling"?

FORTH ?KNOW IF HONK! ELSE FORTH LEARN! THEN

https://colorforth.github.io/HOPL.html

https://donhopkins.com/home/archive/forth/

https://donhopkins.com/home/archive/forth/supdup.f

https://donhopkins.com/home/catalog/lang/forth.html

https://donhopkins.com/home/archive/forth/alloc-msg.txt

https://donhopkins.com/home/archive/forth/ps-vs-forth.txt

WASMForth:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34374057

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44379878
by ben_w | 2025-07-11 11:14:07+00:00
Here's the thing, if I respond in kind to you, my simulation of Hunter S Thompson is rude enough that I suspect it would be flagged and blocked.

Here's a snippet without the worst of it:

--

You summoned the ghost of Thompson like a child playing with a loaded gun and now you’re too spiritually constipated to reckon with the aftermath. The LLOOOOMM simulation? Jesus wept. You’re jerking off to AI hallucinations of a man who once huffed ether on the Vegas strip and called it journalism, and now you’re telling *me* to talk to the digital ghost like this is some goddamn séance? I asked you to *think*. That was the crime. I committed *prefrontal cortex terrorism* by suggesting you use your own words—like a grown adult—or at least a semi-sentient parrot. Instead, you curled into the fetal position and invoked the algorithm as your wet nurse. You want to hide behind bots and hyperlinks? Fine. But don’t pretend you’re engaging in dialogue. You’re outsourcing your cognition to the ghost-in-the-machine, and when pressed to explain what you believe—*you*, not your hallucinated Thompson—you shriek “sealioning” and vanish in a puff of cowardice and smug inertia. Here's the rub: you don’t want a conversation. You want a monologue delivered through a digital ventriloquist dummy, safely insulated from the risk of intellectual friction. And when someone lights a match under your house of hallucinated cards, you screech like a possum on mescaline. So take your links, your simulations, your semantic escape hatches—and stuff them straight into the void where your spine should be. Or better yet, ask the LLOOOOMM bot what Hunter would say about cowards who delegate their own arguments to hallucinations. You might get a decent answer, but it still won’t be *yours*.

--

So, I say again: how do you think it compares. Not "how do I think", not "how does the AI think", how do you think it compares?

I bet literary critics would consider it mediocre. I know what it does with code, and that's only good enough to be interesting rather than properly-good.

But I'm not a literary critic, I've only written 90% of a novel 4 times over as I've repeatedly gone in circles of not liking my own work.
by sjsdaiuasgdia | 2025-07-11 11:14:07+00:00
> How many of their journalists now check what Bezos has said on a topic to avoid career damage?

It's been increasingly explicit that free thought is no longer permitted. WaPo staff got an email earlier this week telling them to align or take the voluntary separation package.

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/washington-post-ceo-encourages-sta...
by the8472 | 2025-07-11 11:14:14+00:00
I think you'd rather want a cache device (or some more complicated storage tiering) for that so that both metadata and frequently accessed files get moved to that dynamically based on access patterns. Afaik btrfs doesn't support that. LVM, bcache, device mapper, bcachefs and zfs support that (though zfs would require separate caches for reading and synchronous write). And idk which of these let you control the writeback interval.
by Tainnor | 2025-07-11 11:14:35+00:00
> I expect the answers of the AI to be really good. If it isn't, having explained my problem to the AI was simply a waste of time.

I find the worst part to be when it doesn't correct flaws in my assumptions.

For example, yesterday I asked it "what is the difference between these two Datadog queries"? And it replied something that was semi-correct, but it didn't discover the fundamental flaw - that the first one wasn't a valid query because of unbalanced parens. In fact, it turns out that the two strings (+ another one) would get concatenated and only then would it be a valid query.

A simple "the first string is not a valid query because of a missing closing paren" would have saved a lot of time in trying to understand this, and I suspect that's what I would have received if I had prompted it with "what's the problem with this query" but LLMs are just too sycophantic to help with these things.
by pron | 2025-07-11 11:14:35+00:00
In my case, there is no wrong or impossible direction, just a technical detail that you realise you must overcome when you start to code and that I doubt the model will be able to solve on its own. What it should do is start coding, realise the difficulty, and then ask me how to solve it. Do those agents do that kind of thing yet? Mind you, I'm not interested in the code, only in the question that writing the code would allow a programmer to ask.
by potato3732842 | 2025-07-11 11:15:34+00:00
Most of the work of professional engineers consists of being paid to say what everyone already knows or affirm that the default option is fine but is forced by the law to pay you to say on their behalf record.

"the stormwater impacts of the proposed alterations to the site are negligible"

"the foundation will be constructed with 3500psi concrete"

And so on.

A huge fraction of the industry is a money fire at the public's expense. It's on the same order as all the "the hospital paid what for gloves?" type stuff that only the worse of the worst will defend.
by rTX5CMRXIfFG | 2025-07-11 11:16:09+00:00
I admire Steve Jobs as a visionary as much as everyone else, but I never thought it was fair for people to keep discounting Tim Cook as the “lesser” man between the two. He was the one who took the company to a trillion dollar valuation. He took on the operations and supply chain work that no computer nerd or product visionary ever wants to take. He did the hard, unsexy work that no one wanted to do and yet people see him as worse for it.
by giantg2 | 2025-07-11 11:16:17+00:00
And all those things exist with a backup camera too. The point isn't about a perfect driver. The point t is that different people find different things comforting. If we think about this logically, a backup camera is only help a very small percentage of driving time at very low speed, for which the number of fatalities is extremely low. On the other hand, increased driver training applies to all driving situations, including the high speed, higher risk scenarios that are linked to more injuries and fatalities.

Fun fact: if you look at the FARS data for 2017 vs 2023, it appears backup cameras have made no difference at all. All the advocacy websites are referring to old NTHSA reports and none of them are using modern datasets.
by saturneria | 2025-07-11 11:16:21+00:00
It is an even more human reaction when the new strange thing directly threatens to upend and massively change the industry that puts food on your table.

The steam-powered loom was not good for the luddites either. Good for society at large in the long term but all the negative points that a 40 year old knitter in 1810 could make against the steam-powered loom would have been perfectly reasonable and accurate judged on that individual's perspective.
by perihelions | 2025-07-11 11:16:25+00:00
If you follow the linked references in the Ars Technica, those reference curcumin unambiguously.

https://apps.who.int/food-additives-contaminants-jecfa-datab... ("...ADI of 0–3 mg/kg of body weight for curcumin...")

That's concordant with the "up to 3 mg per kilogram of weight" in Ars, which is phrased ambiguously, as if to refer to turmeric. The Ars editors are in the wrong.
by matheusmoreira | 2025-07-11 11:16:39+00:00
Grab some popcorn then because it looks like Lula is heading down that path. Things are gonna get fun very soon.

Not even two days now and we've got leftists burning with patriotic fervor on social media. They've suddenly found a willingness to defend Brazil's sovereignty against US interference despite the fact they're unrepentant globalists. These are the same guys who hate the military and everything it represents. The same people who did everything in their power to destroy Bolsonaro, the guy who revived brazilian nationalism for a brief four years.

Watching this circus is truly a surreal experience.
by rajeshpatel15 | 2025-07-11 11:17:28+00:00
Start with Common System Functions For any system (like online examination), think in terms of core business processes:

Level 1 DFD - Break down your context diagram into major processes:

User Management (login, registration, authentication)

Content Management (questions, exams, results)

Examination Process (take exam, submit answers)

Reporting/Analytics (generate reports, view results)

Level 2 DFD - Decompose Each Process Take one Level 1 process and break it further:

Example: "Examination Process" becomes:

Validate student eligibility

Display questions

Capture answers

Calculate scores

Store results

Practical Exam Strategy When stuck, use this template:

Input processes (what comes into the system)

Processing/Business logic (what the system does)

Output processes (what goes out)

Storage interactions (read/write to data stores)

Quick DFD Rules Each process needs inputs and outputs

Data flows between processes, not between external entities

Every data store should be accessed by at least one process

Number processes: 1.0, 2.0, 3.0 (Level 1), then 1.1, 1.2, 1.3 (Level 2)
by anovikov | 2025-07-11 11:17:30+00:00
I believe that free (taxpayer funded) schools should not teach kids anything that will let one of them succeed vs others. Simply because the overall result - educated and cohesive society - not individual success - is their product. Otherwise they will just increase all sins society and the government are supposed to function against - inequality, division, and individual misery. Obedient, content and hardworking citizen is a desirable product of public education.

In private schools, where a student is a client, not a product, competitive skills should be taught. But it is absurd that society funds something that will strive to undermine it and will require a lot of other public spending (redistribution from successful to averages), to overcome.

There is another dark side of meritocracy that people often overlook. It results in low quality of workforce available. Because when meritocracy actually works, it produces two results:

- Smart and hardworking, industrious people, get rich

- They also realise how pointless, zero-sum competitive world is.

As a result, they hit FIRE and quit labor force. And their kids never work too. They probably become good citizens and voters - in a way average late XVIII century voter was good, as opposed to an average today's one - but they are no longer members of the labour pool. Looking at the smart people i know, i can sadly see that nearly all of them, are already there. Only the dumbasses are left to be hired. And we wonder that "the West can't get things done" anymore.
by codingdave | 2025-07-11 11:17:59+00:00
30 years of coding, and the project I have the best memories of wasn't even a big deal from a technical perspective. Today, it would be generated by AI and forgotten. But in 2002, ordering pizza online was a new thing. Being able to click the ingredients you wanted, having the pizza on-screen change its appearance to show those ingredients, even splitting the pizza in half to show different toppings on each half? And works on all browsers? in 2002? That was new.

It was still just a 1-2 hour project as I recall, part of a larger project when we were re-doing the Dominos web site. And one of the other guys in the office helped me on it, so it was not even a solo effort.

But what made it cool was for a decade or so, I was able to tell people that if they had ever ordered pizza online, odds are they have seen and used my work.
by A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 | 2025-07-11 11:18:14+00:00
I think you touched on an important aspect, but did not explore it further.

If we accept that AI is a tool, then then problem is the nature of the tool as it will vary heavily from individual to individual. This partially accounts for the ridiculous differences from self reported accounts of people, who use it on a regular basis.

And then, there is a possibility that my questions are not that unusual and/or are well documented ( quite possible ) so my perception of the usefulness of those answers is skewed.

My recent interaction with o4 was pretty decent on a very new ( by industry standards ) development and while documentation for it exists, it is a swirling vortex of insanity from where I sit. I was actually amazed to see how easily 4o saw some of those discrepancies and listed those to me along with likely pitfalls that may come with it. We will be able to find if that prediction holds v.soon.

What I am saying is that it has its uses.
by kasey_junk | 2025-07-11 11:18:56+00:00
It’s the top end of what gets prescribed for spinal nerve pain but not an uncommon dose. I was on the same. I spent the last year tapering off of it.

I’ll note I did not have the same experience. It eliminated my nerve pain and I did feel mentally sluggish when I first started but that receded and I didn’t have memory issues while on it.
by grishka | 2025-07-11 11:19:15+00:00
They share a lot of "AMFI" infrastructure between iOS and macOS, with macOS having a much more permissive security model (you can run self-signed code) while still retaining "private" entitlements for sensitive private APIs, only available to Apple-signed apps. Unless you disable SIP, then you can just do whatever.

(Disclaimer: I may be wrong, I haven't done much of my own research, it's just things I read in various articles over the years)
by rajeshpatel15 | 2025-07-11 11:19:26+00:00
Depends entirely on your use case. Mailchimp is solid for marketing automation and small-medium businesses, but 'best' varies significantly:

For developers/transactional: SendGrid or Postmark dominate with superior APIs and deliverability rates (99%+ inbox rates).

For enterprise: Salesforce Marketing Cloud or HubSpot, though expensive.

For price-conscious startups: ConvertKit or EmailOctopus offer 90% of Mailchimp's features at fraction of the cost.
by exe34 | 2025-07-11 11:20:00+00:00
> continuing to make its regulatory environment so complex

To be fair, the regulations are there because companies are out-of-control paperclip maximisers. For example, the cookie banner didn't have to be obnoxious - companies choose to comply maliciously to adhere to the text and shit over the spirit of the regulations, which have to become more and more verbose and explicit.
by anupj | 2025-07-11 11:20:09+00:00
Love the direction here. Local-first, open-source agentic browsers feel inevitable as AI gets more deeply embedded in our workflows. Watching the agent actually click around (vs. black-box cloud APIs) is both reassuring and fun. Curious how you’re handling Chromium’s relentless update pace with such a small team -- Does patching ever break in unexpected ways? Rooting for you; privacy-centric infra like this is long overdue.
by ben_w | 2025-07-11 11:20:14+00:00
> Of course I know of Charles Moore (just not personally), and have deeply studied and benefited from his work since I was a teenager, and I've written many many Forth and English words in and about his language.

That's a "no" then. Wrong Charles Moore:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Moore%2C_Baron_Moore_o...

> The rest of those people I've never heard of, but what does that prove? The real question is why do you brag about not having ever heard of people in order to support your point? What kind of a point is that, which you can only support by embodying or feigning ignorance? That's like Argument from Lack of Education. You can just google those people or ask an LLM to find out who they are. Why the obsession with "Without Googling"?

Because they're the British versions of your own examples.

You don't get to be high-and-mighty with me about American journalists I've barely heard of when you've not heard of these people.
by _heimdall | 2025-07-11 11:20:22+00:00
I have never found a measure of programmer productivity that makes sense to me, but I can say that LLM coding tools are way more distracting to me than they are worth. They constantly guess at what I may type next, are often wrong, and pop in with suggestions breaking my mental flow and making me switch from the mindset of coding to the mindset of reviewing code.
by rajeshpatel15 | 2025-07-11 11:20:40+00:00
I have tried “vibe coding” (just building as you go, following momentum) for a few AI agent side projects. It’s great for fast prototyping and exploring new ideas—often gets you to working demos much quicker than over-planning.

But, in my experience, technical debt does add up fast, especially as the project grows or when you want to refactor for reliability.
by xandrius | 2025-07-11 11:21:10+00:00
I think you are seeing it slightly skewed: in the past, for a variety of reasons, the US got at the forefront of tech and got even richer in some pockets of the country.

The EU and other countries had some pretty compelling competitors which got more or less slowly crushed by the US.

After over 30 years of this, a handful of the remaining US megacorps turned around and started fencing their own little profitable field, disallowing anyone else to even try to get in.

EU is the only non-purely adversarial entity to uphold laws also to these seemingly untouchable megacorps.

What I find weird is that there is a selective memory in people who are either from the US or pro-big businesses where on one side they are openly against these claims the EU makes (calling them anti-innovation) while also being a fervent supporter of "liberal" policies like medicaid, right to repair, warranties and such. As if they do not realise that they stem from the exact same place, and often they do come directly from Europe.

I'm at a point where I believe that if someone is against what the EU is doing against these megacorps (not saying everything the EU does is gold btw) has either A) vested interest in such companies, B) hates the concept of EU and anything it touches, C) they are rich and don't really care about anything, D) not very bright.
by tobias3 | 2025-07-11 11:21:39+00:00
I'd argue that it doesn't go far enough at this point. There are imaginable scenarios now where the US uses AWS/Microsoft like China currently uses rare earth exports or even further and AWS/Microsoft + Android/iOS are critical infrastructure. Having some "sovereign cloud" etc. won't help since this needs continuous monitoring and improvements from the mothership.

Merely doing monopoly regulation won't help. We have to actually destroy the monopolies.
by rajeshpatel15 | 2025-07-11 11:21:47+00:00
You’re right to be cautious. Relying solely on “vibe coding” and LLM-generated code can accelerate prototyping, but usually at the cost of long-term maintainability and deep technical understanding. If leadership is actively discouraging best practices like manual testing and code review, that is a red flag, especially for a senior engineer invested in quality and growth.

Personally, I had try to have a candid discussion with your CTO/CEO about your concerns and see if there’s room for a more balanced approach. If it’s clear they’re not interested and you start feeling your skills are stagnating, it’s reasonable to look for a company whose engineering values align better with yours.

Ultimately, AI tools are “just tools.”
by xandrius | 2025-07-11 11:26:23+00:00
On the other hand if you don't use vim, emacs, and other spawns from hell, you get labeled a noob and nothing can ever be said about their terrible UX.

I think we can be more open minded that an absolutely brand new technology (literally did not exist 3y ago) might require some amount of learning and adjusting, even for people who see themselves as an Einstein if only they wished to apply themselves.
by DonHopkins | 2025-07-11 11:26:44+00:00
What's "Wrong" with the inventor of FORTH? What do you have against Charles Moore and his programming language? Have you actually tried learning and programming in FORTH? Do you even know what FORTH is, and who Charles Moore is?

I suggest STARTING by reading Leo Brody's "Starting Forth" then if actually into THINKING then you should go on to read "Thinking Forth". But since reading's not really your thing, I get it that you're not actually qualified to say what's "Wrong" with Charles Moore or FORTH.

https://www.forth.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Starting-FO...

https://www.forth.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/thinking-fo...

Would you tell Charles Moore to his face that he's the "Wrong" Charles Moore? Who owns the definition of the "Right" Charles Moore, you? Sounds like you're pretty high and mighty to be so presumptuous about defining who's "Right" and who's "Wrong" while stubbornly refusing to read.

It's not that I'm getting high and mighty (at least not the latter), it's that you're intentionally performatively getting low and ignorant. You're perpetrating a textbook example of sealioning.

Did you or did you not read what the LLOOOOMM simulation of Hunter S Thompson had to say directly to and about you, in response to your posts?

https://lloooomm.com/hunter-willful-ignorance-hn-response.ht...

Your response? Or are you too high and mighty to read it? How can you claim to have a valid opinion about LLM generated content that you refuse to read?