MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by ljf | 2025-07-24 12:44:42+00:00
I would have previously agreed (that there is nothing quite like it these days) - but my son is now part of an online games coding club. They start off assembling ready made 'Scratch' instructions, and playing at tweaking them. In later lessons they then start to write their own Scratch recipes, before moving to Python libraries then writing Python directly.

So far I've been really impressed with the materials, then tutors and the games they've made.

For what he has learnt, and the support they also provide outside of the lessons, £50 a month feels pretty cheap.
by sctb | 2025-07-24 12:45:25+00:00
I would suggest that, like many things, that line is dependent on all of the details of the situation. Because all of those subtle details (e.g. the mood, receptiveness, familiarity, interest, etc. of the other person and yourself) matter, you need to be able to take those in and respond accordingly. So you could say that a prerequisite for connection is something like "presence", the ability to give your full attention to the interaction itself. Or you could say that this is actually the essence of connection, and the conversation is an expression of that togetherness of presence.
by nix0n | 2025-07-24 12:45:57+00:00
In the Boston area, the bus drivers seem particularly likely to react to this by the second bus passing the first (even by crossing a double yellow: traffic laws are generally optional here).

In the article this is presented as a symptom of how bad the bunching is, but as a rider it feels like this helps the problem: new riders are now getting on the bus that's less full.
by sokoloff | 2025-07-24 12:46:27+00:00
For a Honda 2.2kW to aid with range anxiety, you'd have to split range anxiety into two categories and I think it only addresses the second/lesser of the two.

Assume the car gets 4 miles per kWh delivered and the charging cycle is 90% efficient (measured from generator output). The 2.2kW generator can add 8 miles/hour of generator runtime (2.2 kW * 0.9 * 4 miles/kWh).

For range anxiety of the form "we're driving to a destination pretty far away and I'm not sure we can get there", that's not very helpful. For range anxiety of "I'm driving to a destination that's over half my range and then going to spend a full day [or overnight] there, but I'm not sure there will be working chargers available there", charging 8 mph times 8-10 hours is very helpful.

Worrying about being stuck in the boondocks without a charger is addressed by an 8 mph on-board charger, but I think that's the less common form of range anxiety.

The Chevy Volt range extender was 75kW; the i3's was 26.6kW. 2.2kW is literally an order of magnitude too small to replace those.
by pantulis | 2025-07-24 12:46:31+00:00
> I think the main thing to be worried about is that this model is undermining the fundamental economic model the internet's currently based on.

And this is the reason why Google took its sweet time to counter OpenAI's GPT3. They _had_ to come up with this, which admittedly disrupts the publishers business model but at least if Google is successful they will keep their moat as the first step in any sales funnel.
by jll29 | 2025-07-24 12:46:49+00:00
To add: Reading is also thinking (ideally).

And because reading and writing are thinking we must not delegate it to AI models as a matter of habit. In particular, during students' formative time, they need to learn how to think in reading and writing mode - reflecting, note-taking etc.

Compare it with the use of a pocket calculator: once you have a solid grounding, it's fine to use electronic calculators, but first one ought to learn how to calculate mentally and using pen and paper. If for no other reason, to check whether we made a typo when entering our calculation, e.g. when the result is off by 100 because we did not press the decimal point firmly enough.

I am very concerned that young people delegate to LLMs before reaching that stage.
by bobdvb | 2025-07-24 12:46:53+00:00
It's speculated that YT wasn't profitable long after Google acquired it as well, it's still unclear as to if stand-alone it would be profitable, without the infrastructure benefits of being part of Google.

As a guy who builds big streaming services, I can definitely say profitability is a very hard thing to achieve. Even as compute costs go down, demand for features goes up and long-tail archive costs mount.
by AnimalMuppet | 2025-07-24 12:46:54+00:00
When someone says "How are you", I sometimes say "Crummy, but thanks for asking." I'm not oversharing, but I'm also not giving them a shallow, dishonest reply. I'm leaving the door open for a deeper conversation, but I'm not forcing it. Then it's up to them whether we just move on, or whether a real conversation happens.
Show HN: Stop losing hours collecting client API keys and tool permissions
by DavyCreddy | 2025-07-24 12:47:40+00:00
I've been freelancing for a few years now, and honestly, the most frustrating part isn't the actual work it's getting access to client systems.

Every project starts the same way: 'Hey, can you send me your API keys for X?'

Then it's a week of messages trying to figure out what they actually need to share, which permissions to set, whether they should create a new user... you get it.

So I built this simple tool where I just send a link, you pick what service they need to share with you (Analytics, Hubspot, Stripe, whatever), selects the right permissions from a dropdown, share the link and it's done.

Takes about 30 seconds instead of 30 emails.

Some folks told me they waste up to a week per client just for the credential dance.

Anyone else find client credential collection surprisingly boring?

Would love to hear what you think of this solutions (creddy.me)

Thanks for any feedback
by scarface_74 | 2025-07-24 12:47:55+00:00
No, I pay for Apple News, Slate, Stratechery, Downstream+ (podcast), Accidental Tech podcast, etc.

I donate to electoral-vote.com via Patreon. Most of my news comes from podcasts and those ads don’t bother me as much as web ads. I said I wasn’t morally opposed to them.

I don’t use any app that is ad supported without the option to pay for an ad free experience the same with streaming services.
by keminghe | 2025-07-24 12:48:15+00:00
You're absolutely right about the root cause being outdated AI knowledge bases/training data. I agree, my solution doesn't address that directly.

Where this actually shines is with local LLMs (Ollama, etc) - smaller models, no API costs, fully offline, and the AI gets fresh docs without waiting months for model retraining cycles. Your point about convincing major providers to integrate something like Dash (https://kapeli.com/dash) would definitely be the ideal solution though.

I definitely hear you on the broader ecosystem approach. Anything you've been working on in the same space?
by potato3732842 | 2025-07-24 12:48:22+00:00
"Everyone who doesn't want what I want them to want has been brainwashed by corporate interests" is not a robust assertion under even the most casual scrutiny.

I hate to break it to you but something like a Rogue or HRV does circles around an Altima or Civic when it comes to daily flexibility and utility for a fairly paltry additional cost. It doesn't take a degree in rocket surgery to figure out why they fly off the shelves. For the average person they're a good combination of attributes.
by b3lvedere | 2025-07-24 12:49:14+00:00
In the previous century i visited many lan parties with my absolute beast of a pc case (an old Siemens 4U 19" metal monster where i stuffed an Amd Athlon setup in with a bunch of harddrives) that i got for free from somewhere. Then carried the huge CRT screen and placed it on top of it. It was insane, i was young (and insane), but i got it all dirt cheap. Most people loved it. And even back then repurposing discarded or super cheap hardware for as long as possible for as many functions as possible gave me much joy and saved me a great bunch of money.

If i had to do a "lan party" these days i'd just connect my Steam Deck to some hdmi beamer and play Jackbox games with a bunch of people.
by smcl | 2025-07-24 12:49:15+00:00
The problem there is that there is often far too much variation in the teams year on year - squads change as players get bought, sold or retire, managers come and go. And when you do find a pattern I can virtually guarantee that it won't be due to some novel gamesmanship, but rather finance. It is no secret that the most successful teams are those who are wealthy enough to able to buy (and pay) the most sought-after players and coaching staff, and build and maintain the most sophisticated training facilities (and a whole host of other smaller things that cost money). If we take a look at the finalists of the Europa League this year you can see that the money they both spent on their squad dwarfs all of their previous opponents in the competition combined: https://www.reddit.com/r/soccer/comments/1krtgtt/combined_pu... (ideally you'd factor in wages too but that's harder data to get hold of, but it'll paint a similar picture of not a more polarised one).

What is really interesting and far more worth studying is that there are some very fun outliers - clubs like Bodø/Glimt who have a miniscule annual budget but have overperformed in European competition in recent years. They reached the semi-finals of the Europa League - beating Lazio, Olympiacos, Porto along the way - and in previous years have had similarly deep runs where they battered Roma 6-1 and beat Besiktas and Celtic both home and away. All of the teams I mentioned Bodo/Glimr defeating will have an annual budget that is 10 time theirs (or more) and will frequently make high profile international signings, while Bodo spend frugally and have a predominantly (if not all) domestic squad.

I mentioned Manchester United and Tottenham - they're also outliers worth studying, but in another way. They were both utterly woeful in the league last season despite having astronomical budgets.

If you can crack what causes a Bodø/Glimt, a Manchester United or a Tottenham then you'd be a very valuable addition to the backroom staff of any football club with a desire to punch above their weight...
by DharmaPolice | 2025-07-24 12:49:22+00:00
Certainly with buses people have been burned where they are told that another bus will be along in 2 minutes only for that to evaporate and the next bus actually takes 15+ minutes. If that happens to you then you'll squeeze onto the first bus you can physically fit.

It takes quite a long period of good service to undo one bad interaction.
by kingstnap | 2025-07-24 12:49:37+00:00
EVs don't burn through tires quickly, they just kept you burn through tires quickly.

Tire wear is an extremely strong function of torque. If you accelerate and decelerate calmly then the stiff tires they put on EVs will last a long time.

A lot of people drive EVs extremely aggressively because the motor provides a ton of instant torque and they find it fun.
by travisgriggs | 2025-07-24 12:49:48+00:00
I really like Elixir. We’re a small team of a few.

We work with series of timespans a lot in our domain (ag tech irrigation automation), and I needed to write an algorithm that creates the time based “diff” comparison between two or more span series.

I’ve written this code a few times already in Swift (iOS app), Kotlin (Android app), and Python (firmware). Loop based and tricky around the edge cases.

Doing it in Elixir with pattern based recursion was a pure joy. Every single test past the first time I ran it.

I don’t love the Elixir syntax (it’s noise to signal ratio isn’t as good as say, Python); I don’t love the lack of a good IDE experience that really leverages Elixirs model. But I do love the mental computation model of Elixir, and the very simple set of rules, vs some of the other languages I have to work in.
by constantcrying | 2025-07-24 12:50:20+00:00
>I think his definition of OO is different to what we've got used to.

No. His definition is exactly what people are taught OOP is. It is what I was taught, it is what I have seen taught, it is what I see people mean when they say they are doing OOP.

> Perhaps his definition needs a different name.

No. Your definition needs a different name. Polymorphic functions are not OOP. If you give someone standard Julia code, a language entirely built around polymorphic functions, they would tell you that it is a lot of things, except nobody would call it OOP.

Importantly polymorphic functions work without class hierarchies. And calling anything without class hierarchies "OOP" is insane.
by eagleal | 2025-07-24 12:50:45+00:00
I personally take issue with this because it can be used by the USA to effectively target data protected under EU's GDPR, because the US has an agreement with Israel to send and share raw, non minimized, sigint without going through legal loopholes to sign proper consents within the US Agencies chain of command as required by the 2023 EU-U.S. Data Privacy Framework.

I understand the US' companies and the War in Ukraine made a lot of pressure on EU's lawmakers, but the lawmakers basically nullified the scope of GDPR (military side, in a world where being able to control domestic SIGINT is king), and made EU' domestic companies unable to compete against foreign ones with one single decision (economic side).

It was just irresponsible.
Show HN: Qwen3-Coder API – 480B open-source code LLM
by elricwan | 2025-07-24 12:51:08+00:00
Hi HN,

We just opened public access to Qwen3‑Coder‑480B‑A35B‑Instruct via a REST/SDK API.

Why it might be interesting:

- Fully open-source (Apache‑2.0): https://github.com/QwenLM/Qwen3-Coder - 480B params (35B active MoE), long context up to 1M tokens with YaRN - Matches Claude Sonnet/GPT‑4o on SWE-Bench Verified (81.6%) - Free tier: 100K tokens/month
by rramadass | 2025-07-24 12:51:08+00:00
> I don't think the average software engineer does that or would benefit from doing it. I certainly don't.

Again; you are drawing the wrong conclusions and projecting your own ignorance on others.

To give a simple analogy; anybody can swing a baseball bat at a ball. But that won't make him a notable player. To become a superlative player one needs to understand body dynamics and train scientifically. In a similar vein, anybody can muddle through and come up with a Program. But more often than not, it will be error-prone and bug-ridden not to mention hard to extend and maintain. Given the importance of Software to our modern society this is not what we want. A little bit of knowledge of Mathematics behind Programming gives you orders of magnitude return in software quality which is absolutely worthwhile.

There is nothing to debate/argue here but merely pointing out the application of scientific method to software engineering.
by DanielKehoe | 2025-07-24 12:51:38+00:00
I've written high-quality technical how-tos for many years, starting with PC World magazine articles (supported by ads), a book that helped people learn Ruby on Rails (sales via Amazon), and more recently a website that's good for queries like "uninstall Homebrew" or "xcode command line tools" (sponsored by a carefully chosen advertiser). With both a (small) financial incentive and the intrinsic satisfaction of doing good work that people appreciate, I know I've helped a LOT of people over four decades.

A year ago my ad-supported website had 100,000 monthly active users. Now, like the article says, traffic is down 40% thanks to Google AI Overview zero clicks. There's loss of revenue, yes, but apart from that, I'm wondering how people can find my work, if I produce more? They seldom click through on the "source" attributes, if any.

I wonder, am I standing at the gates of hell in a line that includes Tower Records and Blockbuster? Arguably because I'm among those that built this dystopia with ever-so-helpful technical content.
by astura | 2025-07-24 12:51:39+00:00
Just keep the conversation appropriate for time, place, and how well you know the person. That avoids oversharing.

For example, I overheard a conversation between two coworkers. One asked about a health issue and the other responded with this long drawn out story about an extremely gruesome injury with lots of details leaving everyone extremely uncomfortable. The other coworker complained about to me afterwards, because I overheard it.

He could have said "oh, I'm doing much better! Had a bad injury about six months ago that set me back some, but I'm healed up from that now, thankfully!"

Maybe there's a time and place to share the gruesome details, depending on who your friends are, but it's certainly not with a work acquaintance.
by trevvr | 2025-07-24 12:51:50+00:00
I've looked at this question in Rugby Union. In my opinion. The travel issue is the main factor for home advantage. Travelling is physically and mentally tiring. If you can ease the travel methods. Where you either cultivate a team environment where people will be at ease being away from home / home base. Or travel earlier and in better form. Then you will end up with better away results.
by hshshshshsh | 2025-07-24 12:52:12+00:00
> A good place to start was to figure out what makes me happy. So, I wrote down the best experiences of my life so far. I came up with 20. 19 of them were experiences where I connected with people.

You are assuming you know what best experience you can experience by looking at the past. But this is not necessarily correct. Don't assume you know the answer. Try new things. Some of the best experiences come from within. Boy you would be surprised:)
by randunel | 2025-07-24 12:52:58+00:00
I have an electric Leaf and I've never, ever, used a "fast" charger. I've been plugging it in my 10A garden socket and it's perfect for overnight charging, it goes from 10% to 80% from dusk until dawn.

Annoyingly, I've already invested in a 11kW charger (with 22kW infrastructure) which I've never used!

You don't need "magical DC-charging" to go EV.
by sokoloff | 2025-07-24 12:53:37+00:00
Despite my overall low estimation of people's ability to fluidly reason about engineering tradeoffs, I think they generally do understand this one well enough, at least for the decisions that they will face. They're only deciding which car to buy, not what engine specifications are required to make a car successful in the market.

They go test-drive cars, probably glance at performance specifications and/or read/watch a test drive review of the cars. They can look at the 0-60mph/0-100 kph times and get a feel for "this car will be able to get out of its own way" vs "this car will be a rolling roadblock".

So "actually understand"? Maybe not, but "understand enough to guide their purchasing decision?" and therefore enough for the actual automobile product teams to design to accommodate? I think they do.
by constantcrying | 2025-07-24 12:53:38+00:00
The 35 year mistake was the idea that in order to have a well structured program, your compile time hierarchies have to represent real world relationships.

The talk traces that mistake to Simula, where it was appropriately used, because it was intended to simulate the real world hierarchies. Then to C++ where it started to become used inappropriately, then to Java, where it became a universal Praxis to model all real world relationship as compile time hierarchies.
by masfoobar | 2025-07-24 12:54:19+00:00
While people are likely to hand useful links or videos, I will attempt another method of understanding.

When it comes to organising your code in an ECS-esque fashion, it is much closer to normalising a database except you are organising your structs instead of tables.

With databases, you create tables. You would have an Entity table that stores a unique Id, and tables that represent each Component.. which there would be a EntityId key, etc.

Also, each table is representative of a basic array. It is also about knowing a good design for memory allocation, rather than 'new' or 'delete' in typical OOP fashion. Maybe you can reason the memory needed on startup. Of course, this depends on the type of game.. or business application.

An 'Entity' is useless on its own. It can have many different behaviours or traits. Maybe, if referring to games, you can have an entity that:- has physics, is collidable, is visible, etc.

Each of these can be treated as a 'Component' holding data relevant to it.

Then you have a 'System' which can be a collection of functions to initialise the system, shutdown the system, update the system, or fetch the component record for that entity, etc.. all of which manipulates the data inside the Component.

Some Components may even require data from other Components, which you would communicate calling the system methods.

You can create high level functions for creating each Entity. Of course, this is a very simplified take :-

var entity1 = create_player(1) var boss1 = create_boss1() function create_player(int player_no) { var eid = create_entity(); physics_add(eid); // add to physics system collision_add(eid); // add to collision system health_add(eid, 1.0); // add health/damage set to 1.0 input_add(eid, player_no); // input setup - more than 1 player? camera_set(eid, player_no); // camera setup - support split screen? return eid; } function create_boss1() { var eid = create_entity(); physics_add(eid); health_add(eid, 4.0) // 4x more than player collision_add(eid); ai_add(eid, speed: 0.6, intelligence: 0.6); // generic AI for all return eid; }
by A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 | 2025-07-24 12:54:20+00:00
Eh, it works as an abstract, when you are intentional about your long term learning path, but I tend to ( and here I think a lot of people are the same way ) be more reactive and less intentional about those, which in practice means that if I run into a problem I don't enroll in a course, but do what I can with resources available. It is a different approach and both have uses.

Incremental obviously is the ideal version especially from long term perspective if the plan for it is decent, but it is simply not always as useful in real world.

Not to search very far, I can no longer spend more than a day on pursuing random threads ( or intentional ones for that matter ).

I guess what I am saying is: learning from first principles is a good idea if you can do it that way. And no for docker example. You learn how they should work. When playing in real world, you quickly find out there are interesting edge cases, exceptions and issues galore. How they should work only gets you so far.
by Isamu | 2025-07-24 12:54:20+00:00
You seem to be responding to the reverse, “thinking is writing”, which I agree is not true, you can think without writing.

They are making the point that writing is more than dumping a completed thought. The act of doing that helps you to critique your dumped thoughts, to have more thoughts about your thoughts, to simplify them or expand them.

It’s easier to go meta once you dump your state.
by bobdvb | 2025-07-24 12:54:38+00:00
I sponsor several creators on Patreon, I don't watch early release videos because that would require me to log into Patreon and follow the link.

I've told the creators that I follow that I'm paying to enable them to do what they do, I don't need any more return than that.

I tried Nebula and others, honestly the content was either unappealing, low quality recycled material, or it took too long to find something interesting. The variety of YT is important and I'd also say 30% of my selections are based on duration, fitting the content into my lifestyle as well as my mood.
by graton | 2025-07-24 12:54:39+00:00
Current Honda hybrids are like that. The only time the Internal Combustion Engine (ICE) is directly connected to the drive train is when the speed gets to above around 60MPH. The rest of the time the ICE is used to power a generator which then sends power to the electric motor and/or the battery pack.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QLUIExAnNcE has more info.