MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by other8026 | 2025-07-16 10:07:04+00:00
GrapheneOS isn't going anywhere. People keep getting all anxious when they see news and don't seem to understand the facts.

The lead developer was conscripted, but the rest of the development team prepared for Android 16 and the port was completed in a couple of days.

Device-specific repositories were not included by Google this time, so while the port was finished quickly, they had to work around this. And now GrapheneOS has finished the Android 16 port.

So I'm not sure why people need to freak out and start using insecure devices because they _think_ something will happen with no proof. The fact is GrapheneOS is still going strong. And you can see they've been talking about talks with a big OEM on their socials, so even if new Pixels can't be supported in the future, other OEMs are interested.
by guelo | 2025-07-16 10:08:12+00:00
In a recent talk [0] Francois Chollet made it sound like all the frontier models are doing Test-Time Adaptation, which I think is a similar concept to Dynamic evaluation that Gwern says is not being done. Apparently Test-Time Adaptation encompasses several techniques some of which modify model weights and some that don't, but they are all about on-the-fly learning.

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5QcCeSsNRks&t=1542s
by sjw987 | 2025-07-16 10:09:13+00:00
This is exactly correct.

You just have to look at language learning. Some people who move abroad to a different country with a different language can (over a couple of years) forget huge parts of their own native language.

The internet bombards us with tons of information from all over the place. Even those who have curious minds aren't practicing enough additional engagement to remember all of that information.

Sometimes I feel sad using the internet in the same way I feel going to bookstores. I see so much that interests me but know I only have the capacity to remember, learn, or read so much of it. There may be time to skim a lot of it at surface level, but there isn't enough time and capacity to dive deep into it all.
by azath92 | 2025-07-16 10:09:46+00:00
Yeah, we found even the delay of non-local LLMs to be prohibitive. We started using claude for "smartest" recs and profile generation from preferences and it was so slow, on the order of a minute or so for a first visit and still 20-30s on repeat visits after storing a "profile" (essentially your notion of memoized heuristics) in local storage to come back to.

We ended up finding that a middle ground between that and ~simonw's no-AI but fast, was to use flash for fast semantic understanding of preferences and recs, but degraded quality compared with a friontier model.

> And forward-thinking sites might try to make that process easier, with special APIs/docs/recipe-interchanges for all users' agents to share their progress on popular needs.

HN is that! our exploration was made 1000% easier because they have an API which is "good enough" for most information.
by usef- | 2025-07-16 10:09:57+00:00
Absolutely, I used one for many years before I was professional.

Out of curiosity, what hardware are you picturing those people running it on?

I've run Helix on a Daylight computer, which has a deliberately underpowered CPU (MediaTek Helio G99) and it's incredibly fast/snappy. 110mb is still near-trivial on the 128GB storage.

If you're (validly) worried about bloated software, note that Alpine's helix package is 10.3MB, which is smaller than their Neovim or Emacs packages. Individual language files are small (python is ~500kb uncompressed), there are just hundreds of supported languages. But installed ones are not loaded unless you edit the language.
by znpy | 2025-07-16 10:10:00+00:00
> I used to be on a team that was responsible for the care and feeding of a great many Linux boxes which together constituted the "web tier" for a giant social network. You know, the one with all of the cat pictures... and later the whole genocide thing and enabling fascism. Yeah, them.

I love how people are so willing to criticise companies that paid their salary but not their willingness to ignore the issues in the name of the fat paycheque.

This is clearly a reference to Meta, and in that sense the writing has been on the wall for years.

I wonder if the author feels or takes any responsibility in directly enabling that genocide and that fascism with their direct work.

But hey, a fat paycheque is a fat paycheque.
by rsynnott | 2025-07-16 10:12:49+00:00
> It was mostly obsoleted by Falcon Heavy years ago (SLS has been a black hole of funding since 2011), and its costs are completely ridiculous

Falcon Heavy: Claimed payload to LEO (though it has never done anything like this): 63 tonnes.

SLS: 95t, 105t or 130t depending on version.

These are quite different capabilities.
by sim7c00 | 2025-07-16 10:13:38+00:00
the text is a bit weird. it says to upload your images everywhere on the page.

but it also says: All image processing happens directly in your browser — we never upload your photos to any server. Your images stay private and secure, giving you peace of mind while editing sensitive content.

i think for a tech person its understandable. but a weary non techy might be put off by the asking to upload images and not put 2 n 2 together that the upload is the the app running in the local browser.

id suggest changing terminology in the main parts to not call it uploading an image.

i do like the idea, i dont do a lot of image edits. mostly just blurring out parts (strangers caught in the crossfire!), so not to have some elaborate tool with a million features trying to hide the blur settings for me... welcome :).
by acdha | 2025-07-16 10:14:50+00:00
> You don't think the Python way is worse?

Have you considered how much familiarity might shape your reaction to the two? Both are specific patterns with arbitrary restrictions which new learners have to internalize, and that’s a fairly advanced task most people won’t hit until they are familiar with the language syntax.

Here’s a counter argument: the Python methods are normal method declarations whereas C++ developers have to learn that “operator=“ means something different than what “operator =“ (or any other assignment statement) would mean, and that this is the only context where you can use those reserved symbols in method names.

To be clear, I don’t think either of these is a big deal - the concepts and usage are harder to learn than the declaration syntax – but I think it’s incredibly easy to conflate familiarity with ease of acquisition for things like this.
by moontear | 2025-07-16 10:15:23+00:00
"forced to standardize" - I really haven't thought about it this way, but then it totally makes sense for Apple to cripple their products in the EU (and other markets with similar requirements) making it in turn a worse experience for all consumers.

Not what the EU intended, since this is supposed to be pro-consumer. Ultimately may lead to less sales since the products maybe be worse without all features.
by vardump | 2025-07-16 10:16:00+00:00
China has been a big winner, it can now get cheap energy and it gets to set Russia whatever conditions it pleases. Russia is now utterly dependent on China for many imports.

Russia itself has been the biggest loser. Massive budget deficits, massive inflation. 1M of its smartest people have moved abroad. 1M Russian casualties in the war. Demographics and economy are disastrous.

That and Russia is now a pariah state. No one is going to invest there for a very long time after what Russia did.
by biblioteca | 2025-07-16 10:16:06+00:00
No, they’re right, manufacturing machines like these are independent. We’re so used to interconnected software systems for everything, but even though these things may run old versions of Windows in airgapped or isolated networks, that’s just to run the machines. You give it a thumbdrive, save a part file on it, and as long as it’s got power, materials, and whatever is necessary for basic safety like noble gas for sintering safety, you’re set.

Even accounting systems are able to usually run fairly independently.

It’s not that IT and business and manufacturing support software engineers don’t help, but they aren’t necessary, especially if they’re just making the same thing over and over.
by coffeeaddict1 | 2025-07-16 10:16:09+00:00
I'm still hoping that WebGPU somehow takes off for non-web use so that we have an easy to use cross platform API with an official spec (a replacement for opengl). However, it seems that outside of the Rust world, there doesn't seem to be much interest for using WebGPU for native code. I don't know any big projects using Dawn for example. Part of the reason seems to be that WebGPU came a bit too late and everyone was already using custom-built abstractions over dx, vulkan and metal.
by theshrike79 | 2025-07-16 10:16:28+00:00
This is just for my personal projects. I noticed I was copy-pasting the same crap to claude/gemini/cursor/windsurf/whatever and figured out a git submodule would be the easiest way to have the latest set of rules in every project

That way I can just add new stuff to llm-shared/, commit, push and other projects will get the same things. It also forces me to keep it generic so it fits every project.

Then I just tell whatever LLM to look into @llm-shared/ for instructions and refer to files there when needed instead of having them in the "main" context file.
by victorbjorklund | 2025-07-16 10:16:53+00:00
Why would that be the case? Ukraine has a very large IT sector and they have a lot of good IT security specialists. To be honest, a lot of cybercriminals have been from Ukraine.

So I don't see why it would be the case that Ukraine could not have done this by themselves. They have done previous attacks by themselves. I don't see why that would be the case.

It would kind of be like saying, "Oh, if Russia does a cyberattack, it can't have been them acting alone. It must have been China that gave them the stuff to just press a button."
by cturner | 2025-07-16 10:17:03+00:00
My comment did not talk about where awk is useful today.

Unix gurus will recommend awk as a pattern matching and substitution tool.

But my comment was about awk the vanguard imperative scripting language. I don't know of anyone who recommends use of awk's imperative style over python in 2025.

As an exercise, I tried writing a simple roguelike in awk in an imperative style. Within twenty minutes, it felt obvious where perl came from.
by barrenko | 2025-07-16 10:17:36+00:00
If there was any real will left in EU people, Ukraine would wipe Russia off the map (at least the putinesque remnants), it will happen anyway, but we'd rather just expend vastly more money and vastly more humans and time in the process.

Considering the current rate of inflation, switching the EU economies to war production would save so much money and lives, and bring down prices.
by whywhywhywhy | 2025-07-16 10:17:36+00:00
It's definitely unethical but the creator of Putty keeps insisting and repeating that the Putty website is the long old homepage style URL and "always has been" and "if people search they can find it".

I think if they actually have a problem with it and are not just repeating that to cope they need to start acting like they have a problem with it. Trademarks need defending and you come out the door with the mental model that it's yours, you own it, the other group are in the wrong. If you opened your trademark dispute with "Well our trademark has always been X and people know to find us at X" you're gonna lose your dispute.

It's just hard to argue it's actually a real problem if the individual it's affecting keeps sort of pretending and saying that it's not even if deep down it is.
by ritzaco | 2025-07-16 10:17:51+00:00
> The fundraise also saw participation from AI chip giant Nvidia

This is really obvious 'round-tripping' no? Nvidia invests in startups that are going to spend a majority of their funds on GPUs, Nvidia's revenue goes up, Nvidia's stock goes up, Nvidia makes more 'investments' in startups who use that investment to continue the cycle?
by theshrike79 | 2025-07-16 10:18:04+00:00
Again, in pure Apple style, they had SO MUCH complex math and proxies between them and the image detection system that there would be no way - mathematically proven - that they could see anything.

But the headline says "APPLE SPYING ON YOUR PHOTOS!!11" and that's it. Nobody bothered to spend 5 minutes reading the whitepaper. It was on-device CSAM detection all over again.
by znpy | 2025-07-16 10:18:39+00:00
The second link is from like 2022, and I remember having code checked into git for dashboard in 2021 or so.

> I do not understand why you say it's a worse licence?

Apache license is inferior to the AGPL that Grafana is using. If the project is any good it's just a matter of time before Amazon or some other big company starts selling a fork of the codebase and draining development resources, as it happened with Redis, ElasticSearch and other companies.
by gregorygoc | 2025-07-16 10:19:02+00:00
I do agree they do complement each other… to some extent. My point was rather that if you write a good code, keeping logical arguments in your head should be reduced to the minimum. To the point that only testing edge cases and a happy path in your mind should be sufficient.

To give a more concrete example: I have recently seen a very complicated piece of logic checking whether a subsequent code should be even invoked, but it was hidden in a debris of core logic and other verification. It easily could have been separated and rewritten as a series of early returns and this is what a precondition is. I’m sure someone who wrote the code had it in their mind but was not familiar enough with the early return technique to embed this in code. Had they been, their brain power could’ve been utilized more efficiently.
by ragazzina | 2025-07-16 10:19:37+00:00
I had not seen a recent movie in quite some time. Recently I went to watch Sinners (2025, critically acclaimed). The movie starts with a voiceover saying:

"There are legends of people born with the gift of making music so true, it can pierce the veil between life and death; conjuring spirits from the past and the future..."

Not even an hour passes, and the same exact voiceover repeats word for word that music can conjure spirits from the past and the future, while the scene on screen literally shows music conjuring spirits from the past and the future. It threw me off a little.

Many commenters in this thread point out that on-the-nose-ness in Hollywood movies isn’t new. Personally, I can’t recall a voiceover being repeated verbatim, especially not during the very scene it originally seemed to foreshadow.
by tgv | 2025-07-16 10:19:43+00:00
Python's success is entirely due to entry-level programming courses. They all switched to Python, because you have to explain less. I don't think I heard about web servers in Python before 2012. I suppose a 2005 computer wouldn't be able to serve a Python backend smoothly.

PHP's popularity isn't really from 2005-2006. It was popular at the end of the 90s, and it looks like JS as much as it looks like a potato.
by nappingcat | 2025-07-16 10:21:15+00:00
> Human biology allows your body to get sick and die from bacteria and viruses, sometimes floating in the air.

Not in 99.9% of cases. It's such a twisted disrespect to millions of years of evolution of the immune system. If you had no innate immune system, even being a bubble boy in a hospital with the most advanced equipment could keep you alive only for so long. It's like saying "police lets people get murdered".
by pfdietz | 2025-07-16 10:23:39+00:00
> So many of the things we use today on a daily basis came from having a manned space program.

What are these? If you say "integrated circuits" I'll point out that's largely a lie, unless by "space program" you mean "Minuteman II ICBMs".

"Comes from NASA" ends up meaning "NASA was tagentially involved early on". And really, how could it ever be concluded NASA was essential? You'd need to argue the counterfactual that a technology would not have been developed otherwise, and how can one do that?
by whywhywhywhy | 2025-07-16 10:23:51+00:00
Yes, all the ones actually worth owning are only a few dollars if you have a unique project name, you don't need "every possible domain" you just need one that looks legit.

Unfortunately this is the world we live in where if you don't then someone else will and they'll abuse it so you have to act defensively.

Either you put the time into the project and care about it in which case you should spend the few dollars a year defending it from drama like this, or you don't care even a few dollars worth about the project in which case just let whatever happens happen because you don't care, a .org is the price of a few coffees.

Only a few parts of the world you can leave a bike unlocked on the street, and the internet contains the whole world.
by acdha | 2025-07-16 10:25:25+00:00
“import json” is the kind of thing which requires picking and installing libraries in batteries-not-included languages, and it’s just one of many modules which are in the standard library. That’s not a compelling basis for large projects but over the years I’ve shipped a ton of useful production code which never needed more than the stdlib and thus spent no time at all thinking about deployment or security patching.

Also, it’s not the 2000s any more. Using venv to isolate application installs is not very hard anymore and there have been decent package managers for a long time.
by bayindirh | 2025-07-16 10:25:31+00:00
Pentium 4 had an exceptionally long pipeline to be able to hit higher frequencies, trading-off high IPC numbers in the process, most of the time. On top of that, Pentium 4 also “looped” the same instruction while waiting data resulting in lower efficiency and higher heat output.

So, I assume, they are “step by step” comparable. i.e. slowest P4 equal to slowest G3 and they are again equal at next stepping and so on.
by 9dev | 2025-07-16 10:25:51+00:00
Basically it works like this: You encrypt the data with a long, symmetric key. This data key can be used to decrypt the data itself, which may be large, and thus expensive to re-crypt. Now you encrypt this data key with the user key, and store that encrypted decryption key in addition to the encrypted data. You can also create multiple copies the data key encrypted with different user keys to enable shared access to the encrypted document. This way, you can decommission individual user's access by dropping their copy of the key, and efficiently re-crypt the data key because you don't have to encrypt the full data, but only the key.

In scenarios where you don't have multiple users, you can also just prepend the encrypted data key to the payload (as in, `<encrypted data key>.<encrypted payload>`), so effectively you'll only have to store an encrypted blob and the user key.

Edit: The AWS docs explain this way better than I do: https://docs.aws.amazon.com/encryption-sdk/latest/developer-...
by theshrike79 | 2025-07-16 10:26:41+00:00
With python you can just go: 'print "hello, world!"' and that's a full-ass program

You run it by saying `python hello.py`.

Compare that to the amount of crap you need(ed) with 2005 Java just to have something running.

The shittiness of ActivePython and generally getting python to run on Windows were a bit of a hurdle, but still it was easier than the competition
by nrvn | 2025-07-16 10:27:28+00:00
cybersecurity 101:

- know your threats

- assess your risks based on identified threats

- backup 3-2-1 strategy (3 copies of your data on 2 independent storage places with 1 copy offline and offsite)

- "build the world from scratch" plan with the assumption that all infra is completely and irreversibly destroyed.

- assume you have already been hacked but you don't yet know about it. Build your indicators of compromise based on that simple assumption.

Observing how some "groups of people" act in a totally ignorant fashion is amusing.
by other8026 | 2025-07-16 10:29:12+00:00
Isn't it strange how graphenecheck, draftendirekt, and dontleakkeys were all made less than 6 hours ago and are the only three participating in this discussion? Anyway...

The response to Braxman was after he posted a video calling GrapheneOS's founder crazy and made up a whole bunch of lies about the state of GrapheneOS, then plugged his own product. Clearly trying to damage GrapheneOS while helping himself at the same time. https://grapheneos.social/@GrapheneOS/114824444524603470

The thread about a state sponsored attack came after a sudden flurry of news articles about GrapheneOS being used by criminals and claims that devices running GrapheneOS have been exploited with 0 evidence https://grapheneos.social/@GrapheneOS/114784469162979608

F-Droid's approach is incorrect. GrapheneOS adds the sensors permission the same way that upstream AOSP adds and splits permissions, so F-Droid blaming GrapheneOS for an issue with their app is incorrect. People should read https://grapheneos.social/@GrapheneOS/114790171247296048 for more info.
by tgv | 2025-07-16 10:29:55+00:00
I was aware of photography. But it's remarkable that guitars and synths seem to be the only two instruments.

> It's linked to the dopamine anticipation loop that buying an item feels like you're making progress.

I'm not fond of such explanations. The brain is so much more than dopamine. I don't think there's even a thorough explanation linking buying a guitar and dopamine, let alone one that can link it purely to dopamine. Buying is not a loop either.
by sjw987 | 2025-07-16 10:30:11+00:00
This seems a bit of a stretch of a claim to make. In what ways would you say that Russia is a decade behind?

I visited Russia a few years ago. Commercially, they have all the same technology we have (for me, in the UK). Like us, they outsource most of their manufacturing to China, but internally they produce software equivalent to (or to be honest greater than) what we produce. The difference seems to be that a lot of Russian software, websites and apps are more local, which gives the illusion that it's not as good. Google is multinational, whereas the equivalence Yandex sticks to Russian and Slavic language countries. I was actually quite surprised to see in some areas they are ahead in digitising things (government services, payments). I expected the opposite.

Whatever software you can think of originating from the US, UK, or wherever, Russia has an equivalent. The major difference isn't the technical ability, but the commercial and cultural reach of that technology. Most of the world is happy to use Facebook, except Russia (and some others) who uses VK. We don't use VK, because it's Russian and we already use Facebook. Google, Facebook, Twitter, Uber (all artificially high value commercial products) have Russian equivalents. Sometimes they are even combined into one (Yandex has an Uber-like service within it). And when it comes to hardware, none of us are particularly strong with that. We all designate that to China, who sells it to all of us equally.

Whenever we hear about cyberwarfare, cybercrime and exploits, we usually pin it on Russian/Chinese speaking hackers. Russia seems to have better primary, secondary and tertiary education in computing, and, like the rest of Eastern Europe, produces many of the better programmers (something you can see in open source communities). From discussions with Russians, the level of maths, science and computing education is higher at a younger age than it was for me in the UK. Quite a lot of what would be A-level (18) Maths in my country was taught at Russian secondary school level (16).

In warfare, Russia has made fools of themselves in Ukraine, but on the other hand war is (sadly) the greatest contributor to military evolution. We see that with the introduction and evolution of drone warfare. Our UK Challenger tanks have been disabled and destroyed by far lower cost drones. All the technology associated with that (comms, jamming, avoiding jamming, self-targeting) is being rapidly developed by both Ukraine and Russia on the battlefield right now.

Where exactly would a decade back put them, technologically speaking?