MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by lazide | 2025-07-13 20:56:59+00:00
He was here legally.

“He gained legal permission to remain in the United States and established a life here. But in March of 2025, Mr. Abrego Garcia would find himself unlawfully deported and detained in a Salvadoran prison with the very gang members he had fled.” [https://www.gwlr.org/kilmar-abrego-garcia/]

A Immigration Judge had reviewed his situation and given him protected status. Which the Trump admin willfully ignored.

I’m not focusing on a specific example to hide the truth - I’m focusing on a clear, very public, example where the Trump admin itself is making a clear example that they’ll do everything in their (significant) power to do exactly what you are saying they won’t be doing.

And which you keep refusing to acknowledge.
by timr | 2025-07-13 20:57:16+00:00
> I am tired of people ignoring the US Condition. And in this context, rejecting the Due Process clause. Due Process us for all that enter the USA!

Also tired of this rhetoric. Due process is the process that is due, nothing more. It has been -- will can continue be -- redefined by the government to execute laws.

Again, I don't support everything the current administration is doing, nor do I assert that everything they are doing is legal. But that will ultimately be decided by the due process of law, which is what the term means.

Given that there are a great many trials underway concerning these questions, I am not concerned that the due process of law has disappeared.
by jeremynixon | 2025-07-13 20:57:41+00:00
This blog post is flawed. "Life insurers can predict when you'll die with about 98% accuracy." Is not even properly framed and is found nowhere in the cited report.

Predictions of when you will die need a range in order to be attached to a number like accuracy. The attached report is not about this but about population-level mortality trends.
by BobbyJo | 2025-07-13 20:58:22+00:00
> Tariffs are not now, have never, and will never lead to an increase in domestic production.

I disagree. Its a pretty straightforward market force.

> The US has done this multiple times already and the result is always the same.

Personally, I don't buy the argument that "it didn't work 100 years ago, so it can't work today." The circumstances are entirely different. The global economy is entirely different. The US's role in the world is entirely different. We are also not in the middle of a great depression, which I imagine would also affect the outcome.

> The results, everywhere, every time, forever, are always the same.

In 2018 the US instituted steel tariffs and it increased domestic steel manufacturing.
by theideaofcoffee | 2025-07-13 20:59:18+00:00
And nothing of value was lost. These industries, insurance in particular, pharma coming in a close second, are just parasites, sucking the vitality out of everything by their sick rent seeking and giving crumbs, if that, in return. The faster they can be torn down and liquidated, the better. Maybe helping the overall population boost their wellness with more-or-less miracle drugs like GLP-1s can hasten that.
by nmstoker | 2025-07-13 20:59:21+00:00
Link to the paper it's based on (by same author):

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S23522...

Assuming the key points are valid (they seem reasonable), I'd argue that we'd probably be in a better position with social media if it weren't for the platforms taking on managing our interactions with others. If people had their own software/agents that would filter according to your own needs, we'd likely see less toxicity - but this comes tumbling down as I suspect the platforms would see a dent in their monetisation, and so naturally they wouldn't be in favour.
by zeraholladay | 2025-07-13 20:59:52+00:00
I am in a similar situation as you, but in a lot of ways you're asking more sophisticated questions than me. FWIW, I've been building a little toy lisp-scheme like scripting language as a learning tool: https://github.com/zeraholladay/lispm/tree/main. It's been a lot of fun and I've really enjoyed exploring parts of CS that my career hasn't really taken me to.
by polyglotfacto2 | 2025-07-13 21:00:28+00:00
> Some prior studies that find speedup do so with developers that have similar (or less!) experience with the tools they use. In other words, the "steep learning curve" theory doesn't differentially explain our results vs. other results.

I think one would have to compare the difficulty level of tasks.

I speculate that on easy tasks, LLM's can do a great job based on their training data alone, so you'd experience a speedup regardless of your prompt engineering skill level. But on large codebases and for complex tasks, an LLM cannot stand on it's own legs, and the differentiator becomes the quality of the prompt.

I think you'd need not only expert programmers, but expert programmers who have become expert prompt engineers(you would need some kind of extensive system prompt describing how the large codebase works), and those don't really exist yet, I think.
by eska | 2025-07-13 21:00:51+00:00
Pets and young children also give you unconditional love. If you’re mad at them, they think it’s their fault. If you need somebody to depend on you (the AI also does), then you have some soul searching to do. Ask yourself why an individual on your level won’t love you. Maybe you’re just a bad person or never learned how to interact with someone.
by akifq | 2025-07-13 21:01:25+00:00
Ran Vibe Kanban on a side repo over the weekend it’s slick, but I tripped on one thing: all the agents write into the same checkout, so parallel cards can clobber each other when they touch the same files. I’ve been spinning up a quick `git worktree` per card as a stop gap.

Outside of that, really enjoying the flow.

BTW, if anyone’s juggling multiple agents and wants a “quarantine” layer before changes hit Git, I’m hacking on SAV (Shadow VCS)open source, risk scores every commit and keeps them sandboxed until you approve. Happy to swap notes. https://github.com/AKIFQ/sav
by degamad | 2025-07-13 21:01:34+00:00
As an Australian English and Indian English speaker and a mathematician, I have never heard the word plurality outside of discussions of the US political system.

I have seen nitpicking on whether the word majority is the right word for a relative majority, but only seen plurality offered as an alternative by American English speakers who are also students of the American political system.

I would almost never expect anyone to say "the plurality of cars sold are Toyotas", for example.
by queenkjuul | 2025-07-13 21:01:58+00:00
Lmao. Germany invented the car, most modern automotive technology (fuel injection, front wheel drive, all wheel drive, and more) were invented in Europe, the web was started in the UK, personal computers were also made in Europe by European companies to fairly widespread success, not to mention such fundamental innovations like engines and railroads

No country has a monopoly on innovation, you're being absolutely ridiculous

Eta: the tape recorder was invented in Europe. The compact cassette and compact disc were developed by Phillips to unimaginable commercial success. I'll keep coming back as i think of more :)
by holmesworcester | 2025-07-13 21:02:46+00:00
One thing that has been helpful for me in understanding immigration is to think of this as a case where the law (an aggregation of what the public over the past several decades thinks it wants) is in conflict with what the public actually wants, as expressed by its interpersonal and economic decisions.

Americans are overall extremely happy to transact with, socialize with, be neighbors with, have children with, and educate the children of undocumented immigrants. This strong expression of what we really want (in our actual decisions) creates a powerful incentive pulling people here. Put differently, if a majority of Americans hated undocumented immigrants, impeded them at every turn, and boycotted their labor and the services of businesses that hired them, the number of people who come here would be very different.

In an analogy to tech policy, when you ask the average voter "should people have access to private communication tools that are private even against legitimate warrants under the rule of law, even in cases of serious crimes or terrorism" everyone says "no!" But if you ask them, would you like an app where your own messages are private, many people choose that app, and many engineers and major publicly traded companies choose to build such apps.

We explicitly run a society that uses multiple dueling measures of what people want, the main ones being the will of voters and peoples' choices in the marketplace. Immigration is one place where those two measures collide, and here we are.

As a result, I think it's insufficient to simply point to the law. Maybe the laws are wrong. If we have a strong signal that this is true (in this case the economic and social reality of broad acceptance and integration of undocumented immigrants) we should be especially cautious to be reasonable in how we enforce the laws. This is an important principle in freedom-based societies.
by danlitt | 2025-07-13 21:03:52+00:00
I think the lost-revenue number is important and relevant, it underlines the hypocrisy of US fascism to be claiming on the one hand to balance the books while spending billions of dollars on performative cruelty. But I do think only presenting the numbers in isolation is insufficient, and comes off a little strange. Even a little blurb at the top (this is an unprecedented failure of the rule of law, ICE agents frequently arrest people illegally, this kind of thing) would be an improvement. It isn't actually clear at face value whether you think this project is morally wrong, or just expensive.

There are some quantitative questions it would be good to clarify, too. For instance, "convicted criminal" - does this cover people convicted of real crimes, or fake ones engineered by the administration? "pending criminal charges" - are these arrests illegal or likely illegal? should they be portrayed in a hostile light, or just neutrally, as if the courts are going to find these people guilty they just haven't got to it yet. Other useful segments that are relevant include the splitting up of families, the detention of children and the vulnerable, withholding of medication and religious materials. Unfortunately, the list goes on.
by dspillett | 2025-07-13 21:03:55+00:00
Devs are often either not good business people and/or don't want to be. Freelancing, in any industry, involves a lot more than just doing the actual job.

Also, as others have already mentioned, salaried with is much more stable.

At least these are my primary reasons, and those of some others I've spoken to on the matter.
by giardini | 2025-07-13 21:04:00+00:00
thisisit says: "...this guy will try that even if it is illegal..."

How will he "try that"? He hasn't done anything illegal and, if he does, his own staff and the courts will prevent him from doing it.

thisisit says: "With the what has happened to immigration..."

They've slowed illegals entering the country and they've begun to move immigrants out of the country. How is this a problem?

I never cared much for birthright citizenship other than for offspring of slavery but arguing about it hardly seems a good argument for or against Trump.
by jononor | 2025-07-13 21:04:17+00:00
Lua is a great language, including for embedded. And I am sure that their Lua-based product is good also. But this article was not very convincing as to why it "beats MicroPython". The criticisms are vague or not correct. Extending MicroPython in C is quite easy, and one can implement third party modules in the same way all the official modules are made. There is build variable to set for including that into your custom firmware build - nothing particularly tricky about it. The article goes on to lament that popular libraries from Python world are not available, including numpy. But actually there is a very good reimplementation of numpy (and parts of scipy), called ulab.
by jillesvangurp | 2025-07-13 21:04:24+00:00
What I always appreciated with Neal Stephenson is the level of nerdy detail in his books. It's what makes re-reading his books very enjoyable. Which is something I do every few years or so. Gibson's Neuromancer is often recommended as a thing to read next. But to me that's a very different type of book. Basically, Gibson uses a lot of word soup to create a futuristic vibe and mood but in the end it's just a stylistic thing rather than a coherent view of the future and at this point it's a bit dated. As a vision it was all a bit dystopian and cool at the time. But not very coherent.

Stephenson's world building has a bit more depth to it. You can pick up the Diamond Age today and it still reads well and in a way a lot of stuff that is going on with LLMs make that a super relevant book right now. There are a lot of ideas and moral dilemmas that the book raises. What happens if you take the notion of a poor girl receiving a quality education from an AI and it starts subverting the child's mind with crazily addictive story telling, and adaptive behavior. What happens if you create an army of a quarter million girls with a copy of the same AI book.

The reality of an ipad like device that might have some beefed up version of chat gpt on it that starts bonding with a toddler and executing an educational agenda over years is not that unimaginable any more. A lot of kids know how to unlock their mom's phone before they learn to walk/talk these days. Not the same thing of course but the whole morals and ethics around the topic are exactly what Stephenson explored in the early nineties with that book.

A lot that is science fiction in that book still is; but some of it just became science fact. In the same way, Snow Crash is still pretty fresh. The whole Meta thing a few years ago was directly inspired by that book. And they made a mess of it. We still don't have proper VR. But the tech is definitely getting closer.

Neuromancer never had that quality to me. It's alright as a book but ultimately a bit shallow.
by codingWithJess | 2025-07-13 21:04:28+00:00
I wasn’t sure what to expect, but this feels less like software and more like an artifact. I typed in a half-remembered dream about a broken clock in an empty hallway, and the interpretation hit something oddly personal it framed it around time lost and internal silence. I get that it’s just symbol matching, but the presentation and restraint (no AI, no server) make it feel intentional, almost ritualistic. I’d love to peek into the actual logic engine, is it weighted strictly by keyword presence, or is there deeper tone handling involved?
by readmodifywrite | 2025-07-13 21:04:45+00:00
Katee Sackhoff did an interview with Ron Moore on her podcast, and one of the topics they discussed was how they would write the "technobabble" in Star Trek (and BSG). Moore said they would write the script and just say things like "they tech the tech with the tech until it techs" and then fill in the actual technobabble words later!
by justusthane | 2025-07-13 21:04:51+00:00
I’ve been facing a similar search for an ultra-simple but ultra-extensible monitoring solution for my homelab. I’ve had the idea to write a Python program where the main script is just responsible for scheduling and executing the checks, logging, and alerting based on set thresholds.

All monitoring would be handled via plugins, which would be extremely easy to write.

It would ship with a few core plugins (ping, http, cert check, maybe snmp), but you could easily write a plugin to monitor anything else — for example, you could use the existing Python Minecraft library and write a plugin to monitor your Minecraft server. Or maybe even the ability to write plugins in any language, not just Python.

I’m not a developer and I’m opposed to vibe coding, so it’ll be slow going :)
by dongcarl | 2025-07-13 21:05:24+00:00
At Obscura we just tunnel WireGuard over QUIC's unreliable datagram mechanism to make it look like HTTP/3 (for DPI): https://github.com/Sovereign-Engineering/obscuravpn-client/b...

We just upstreamed our patch to quinn-rs that pads Datagrams to MTU: https://github.com/quinn-rs/quinn/pull/2274
by Ray20 | 2025-07-13 21:05:51+00:00
>there will always be those networking and collaborating and bypassing whatever restrictions get put in place.

I don't think so. It's just a question of the severity of the punishment for violating regulations. A couple of small fines for an unlicensed networking and collaborating - and there will be no one left.

>There's a ton of cheap tools now that can be used for running local or citywide networks, hams have their own packet radio stuff.

The issue has never been in the technical plane. The equipment for building and operating networks has become dozens of times more accessible over the past couple of decades. The problem is in the increasing number of regulations that purposefully lock all clients into a few select controlled service providers. They have a goal and they have the tools to achieve it, so it's only a matter of time before they reach the minority of network-enthusiasts.
by vrc | 2025-07-13 21:05:53+00:00
Yes. For very high risk patients, payers do want this. I’ve even heard of some paying pharmacies $100/fill if done on time for select people.

The problem is, prediabetic and folks who may have crossed 7.0 A1C once, and just overweight folks with docs who are willing to play fast and loose are demanding it. Skipping metformin and other first line treatment options that are way cheaper. For those folks, complications might be the next guys problem.
by CharlesW | 2025-07-13 21:07:10+00:00
> MIT estimates only 5% of the workforce can be replaced long term.

The model by MIT's Daron Acemoglu estimates that ~5% of U.S. tasks can be completely and profitably automated by AI within ten years.

It was expressly not a head-count forecast, and didn't attempt to quantify the headcount reduction that AI augmentation could enable.
by nwienert | 2025-07-13 21:07:20+00:00
This is nearly perfectly wrong.

There’s nothing in these drugs that makes you lose more muscle than fat, you don’t lose any more muscle than if you do a regular diet, not even slightly.

Second, the drugs don’t do anything to cause you to gain back mostly fat, and people going off them have more success, not less, than your average person who loses weight rapidly whether through diet or other means.

The average person who is 50lbs overweight because they gained 5lbs a year for a decade will lose all of that weight within 6 months with nearly entirely positive side effects, and if they stop taking it, will regain a bit less than they did before, meaning it would take another decade to get back to where they were. That is unequivocally a huge net positive.

It’s not like Testosterone which does have dramatic negative effects when taken long term and can cause dependency.

It also happens to be extremely effective at reducing bad habits, and yes those habit changes persist after quitting - not perfectly, but surprisingly so. This even works for smoking, drinking, and gambling.
by JoshTriplett | 2025-07-13 21:08:20+00:00
You quoted the entirety of https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44553357 apart from the "Yea" and the period at the end, and then provided a spirited defense on behalf of the current administration, suggesting that everything's largely fine if only people would just stop breaking the law, and complaining about people who call the current administration irredeemable. You then acted surprised and annoyed that your "respectful and polite" comment was downvoted and tried to shame people for flagging it. Won't someone think of the poor beleaguered right-wing politicians who are just enforcing the law, and get called cruel and irredeemable for it?

Respectfully and politely: you are completely failing to appreciate or acknowledge the situation, and doing so helps enable the abuses that are taking place. To give a parallel example, you'd get a comparable response if you said "police only kill criminals, with a few high-profile cause celebrè exceptions; people should just stop breaking the law".
by DinoNuggies456 | 2025-07-13 21:08:46+00:00
That’s such a poetic way to describe it “an artifact” is exactly what I was going for. And yes: while it starts as pure keyword detection, there's a layered tone system underneath. There’s no NLP or AI behind it, but the combinatoric effects sometimes feel alive. I’m working on ways to make the logic more transparent without breaking the mystique maybe a toggle that reveals the symbolic parse tree? Appreciate you giving it a real test! :D
by aorth | 2025-07-13 21:08:58+00:00
I've been paying for Relay for years. I use it all the time. It's great!

I use Firefox out of principle, and might pay or donate to it if I felt Mozilla was the same organization that it was when it fought for the open, standards-based web. The handful of missteps along the way haven't increased user trust.

I had been donating to Thunderbird for a few years until I recently realized they paid $4,000 to be a silver sponsor at SCALE 22 https://www.socallinuxexpo.org/scale/22x/sponsor/thunderbird. I was under the assumption they needed money for developers.
by chickenzzzzu | 2025-07-13 21:09:14+00:00
The fatal flaw in your theory is that Docker, Claude, and whoever else will add an infinite amount of time spent debugging once you have a sufficiently complex problem, which is usually within 1-7 days of using it.

Please explain to me how I'm wrong. in the event you don't want to hear how I'm right, I am forstalling that while waiting for your reply
by bazzargh | 2025-07-13 21:09:15+00:00
This is frustratingly difficult to understand from the site because they never include a human in the photos for scale (though the text says it's 3m in diameter). This video is a bit better https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvL0T5xyG5E ... it shows a cutaway in a scale model that makes it clearer where people stand, pictures of people painting the exterior and video of the globe in motion. I can't find any of what it looks like inside while in motion, which would have been nice. I guess I'll just have to go visit!
by hn_throwaway_99 | 2025-07-13 21:09:36+00:00
This is essentially the story of tech companies across nearly every industry where they have come to dominate.

This is one reason that I see most tech companies as essentially a net negative for society at large, as the goal is nearly always to control a large monopoly (and this is fully admitted by many tech leaders, e.g. Thiel) which the Internet makes possible. Pre-Internet you would see the same dynamics, but usually on a much smaller regional scale. I think that many of the growing problems in society today are fundamentally attributable to the extreme concentration of wealth and power that modern tech enables.
by evil-olive | 2025-07-13 21:09:44+00:00
> I think you should loop John Doe from team X into this discussion

yeah, that's a useful thing that a chatbot could do...in theory.

in practice, from the recent CMU study [0] of how actual LLMs perform on real-world tasks like this:

> For example, during the execution of one task, the agent cannot find the right person to ask questions on RocketChat. As a result, it then decides to create a shortcut solution by renaming another user to the name of the intended user.

0: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2412.14161 (pdf)
by cjbgkagh | 2025-07-13 21:10:11+00:00
I’ve been on it for years, at a lower dose though, the counter action by the body is probably dose dependent so my theory is lower for longer is more sustainable. I think people get attached to the rapid weight loss, coupled with the high expensive, incentivizes higher doses. I take gray market supply and it’s rather cheap.

Also it should be mostly used as an adjunct to strict diet and exercise.