MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by saubeidl | 2025-07-05 09:04:50+00:00
You've lost me. I'm not sure what you're trying to say here, could you rephrase your point in a more coherent way please?

But also, yes, Austria was on the brink of fascism not too long ago. Our far-right party almost got to form a government and their plans were quite sinister.

Thankfully, disaster was averted due to egos and greed - the far-right and center-right couldn't agree on who gets to pilfer to country more, so they didn't end up forming a coalition.
by pyman | 2025-07-05 09:06:05+00:00
You've just created an account to ask that question? Wow :D

https://kqmarkets.co.uk/article/did-peter-thiel-meet-satoshi...

https://protos.com/is-peter-thiel-inner-circle-behind-the-sa...

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-10-21/peter-thi...

"Peter Thiel met with the e-gold team in February 2000 on the Caribbean island of Anguilla to discuss making PayPal interoperable with e-gold. The goal was to challenge central banks by creating a system where PayPal and e-gold could work together. Thiel believed this collaboration could spark a revolution against traditional financial institutions."

Actions speak louder than words.

- Thiel met with digital currency pioneers in 2000.

- Thiel chose not to partner with E-Gold because he needed to stay compliant and bank-friendly.

- A few years later, Bitcoin quietly appears, solving the exact problems E-Gold ran into.

- No names. No funding trail. No way for banks to know who the enemy is. Just Bitcoin wallets full of money.

It doesn't sound like a bunch of idealistic cypherpunks building tech to save the world. It sounds like a few smart, well-connected people who understood how money moves, got frustrated with the banking system and their fees, and built a way to create wealth and move value without paying commissions.

The cypherpunks laid the groundwork for the encryption banks, governments, and corporations now depend on. They were never interested in dodging taxes or avoiding bank fees.
by ducksinhats | 2025-07-05 09:07:09+00:00
>whynotboth.jpg

Strangely no mention of knative in this thread, there's a lot of tradeoffs in going full serverless and the promised reduction in infra costs/wages doesn't always pan out.

It's a fairly mature CNCF project at this point and makes running your own serverless setup quite simple.

I doubt the fight between microservices and batch processing will end any decade soon but it's easy enough to run both on the same infra, that most importantly you control.

Wouldn't call it the best of both worlds, but it's reasonable enough to offer you the option of both worlds.

https://knative.dev
by whatevertrevor | 2025-07-05 09:07:16+00:00
I get that, I go through periods of falling in and out of them too after having grown up with them. But there is a huge fraction of my age group (and a little older) that have consistently had games as their main "consumption" hobby throughout.

And then there's the age group younger than me, for whom games are not only a hobby but also a "social place to be", I doubt they'll be dropping gaming entirely easily.
by mellosouls | 2025-07-05 09:07:20+00:00
NB. For the time-being at least, you can OPT OUT of the new pricing on the Settings Menu in Advanced Settings.

Cursor deserve the criticism, but its been pretty obvious since they introduced the new Ultra plan that we were going to see classic enshittification on the formerly premium options. Very frustrating for long term supporters especially.

Note that although this update apologises for the miscommunication (which looks more like deliberate obfuscation), the only option for getting what we paid for (I'm on the annual plan) is the menu setting above, which should be default on!
by madaxe_again | 2025-07-05 09:07:27+00:00
Window glass in most modern vehicles is laminated rather than a simple tempered pane - makes them less likely to shatter in a rollover, and thereby eject occupants, but harder to break through in an emergency.

TBH I see this more as a “firefighters aren’t being given the right tools” issue, as this is far from unique to Tesla, and the tools have existed since laminated side glass became a requirement - but don’t seem to yet be part of standard issue or training.

https://www.firehouse.com/rescue/vehicle-extrication/product...
by snvzz | 2025-07-05 09:07:49+00:00
It is indeed a mistake to target Linux, as it guarantees the majority of effort will be spent tracking Linux, rather than working on the filesystem itself.

There are far better options such as FUSE or the filesystem APIs in other operating systems like Netbsd, Haiku, Genode or even ReactOS (and Windows NT).

Some of the best filesystems such as OpenZFS, HAMMER2 or Lustre are developed outside of Linux.
by dataflow | 2025-07-05 09:09:22+00:00
If you like Poul Henning-Kamp, also see the following by him:

- "NSA Operation ORCHESTRA: Annual Status Report": https://mirrors.dotsrc.org/fosdem/2014/Janson/Sunday/NSA_ope...

- The bikeshed email: https://phk.freebsd.dk/sagas/bikeshed/
by i_cannot_hack | 2025-07-05 09:09:22+00:00
> I can tell you down to the day how many bitcoin there will be decades from now.

As this story itself demonstrates, you clearly can't, and it already has the potiential to affect markets: "18.04 million bitcoin sits in dormant accounts. Sizable inactive accounts that wake up after years of dormancy draw investor attention because of the potential market impact if those coins are sold."

It's impossible for you to know if the accounts are dormant intentionally or because the owner has died or lost access - and in the latter case the coins are effectively lost or destroyed in every practical sense. So you can't even say how many usable bitcoins exist at this very moment, and it is even more impossible for you to tell exactly how many accounts will be lost in the future.
by anonzzzies | 2025-07-05 09:09:55+00:00
Plumber, carpenter, welder, electrician etc. In the countryside where I live, I do all of these when I feel like it for myself, friends and sometimes strangers in trouble (pipe burst, no power). It pays well; I could live of that and save very comfortably here if I did it half of the time, but I only do it the odd few hours while people begging for welding jobs, wooden doors, etc. It can be a nice little business, especially if you can find employees and move on to house building or renovations, but it will never be bigger than that was of course, you would be in the countryside.
by globular-toast | 2025-07-05 09:10:37+00:00
Bitcoin (capital B) is valuable. An individual BTC is not, but that's true of any currency. We can argue until the cows come home about how valuable these things really are. Speculation in these markets makes it too difficult to judge. People will bet on these things not because they are delivering lots of value to us right now or in the future, but just because they think they'll still be around in the future. That gives monopolists like the ones above the advantage, regardless of value delivered.
by retube | 2025-07-05 09:10:54+00:00
> I can tell you down to the day how many bitcoin there will be decades from now

So what? if you say "scarcity", that by itself has no value. plenty of things are scarce, but are not valuable, no one wants it.

And anyway, bitcoin is not even scarce. there are thousands of other coins now, anyone can create one, these will / are diluting the $$$ going into btc
by bravesoul2 | 2025-07-05 09:10:58+00:00
Not convinced. Offshore has been possible since forever. Maybe IC cam be remote now. Your team can be global. US lead, 2 India based devs, 2 brazil devs. But not having this wasn't a blocker for saving money.

10, 100 or 500 people team in India who could work in the office together was possible forever.

It will change. I think once other countries become bigger investment centres. Not sure how yet though. US is a good potting soil for a startup because there is this huge addressable and free market. And the startup ecosystem. Then add in that most startups want WFO and minimum synced time zones... and for larger tech all that specialism is in house in the US.
by dazc | 2025-07-05 09:12:07+00:00
I believe most publishers are still using human writers although the are obviously all getting their ideas from the same source. It's hard to find any 'lifestyle' content that doesn't have 100 or so similar versions.

Around 15 years ago I employed an journalist to write unique articles for a wedding site project - it was all copied by bigger sites who easily outranked us. A lot f this content was 'ever-green' and is still around to this day.

I learned not to spend so much money on content after this point. I guess most other people did too - hence the general lack of quality.

Ironically, these sites are now complaining about regurgitated AI content. I find it hard to sympathise.
by michaelbrave | 2025-07-05 09:12:24+00:00
yes that was the gist of Ira Glass's quote, but he also added to it that it makes you feel frustrated when you have taste but are not creating things that live up to that taste, but that as a young artist you should push through that.

Here is a copy paste of the quote:

“Nobody tells this to people who are beginners, I wish someone told me. All of us who do creative work, we get into it because we have good taste. But there is this gap. For the first couple years you make stuff, it’s just not that good. It’s trying to be good, it has potential, but it’s not. But your taste, the thing that got you into the game, is still killer. And your taste is why your work disappoints you. A lot of people never get past this phase, they quit. Most people I know who do interesting, creative work went through years of this. We know our work doesn’t have this special thing that we want it to have. We all go through this. And if you are just starting out or you are still in this phase, you gotta know its normal and the most important thing you can do is do a lot of work. Put yourself on a deadline so that every week you will finish one story. It is only by going through a volume of work that you will close that gap, and your work will be as good as your ambitions. And I took longer to figure out how to do this than anyone I’ve ever met. It’s gonna take awhile. It’s normal to take awhile. You’ve just gotta fight your way through.” ― Ira Glass
by forty | 2025-07-05 09:12:24+00:00
It's quite common knowledge :) if you want journalist material, I think there was a Cash Investigation on the topic a few years ago.

I have discussed this topic with many other engineers (known from engineering school, from working 13+ years in the Paris tech startup ecosystem and from my worker union, whose scope include most tech companies) and I have never heard any of them saying they did not write bullshit CIR reports for bullshit projects. I have myself written my fair share of those bullshit reports. There are even companies whose business is to write the bullshit reports for you in exchange for x% of your CIR credit. I worked with such company.
by eru | 2025-07-05 09:13:23+00:00
> Additionally essential was realizing that computation (run search for a while) with a bad model could be effectively+efficiently used to generate better training data to train a better model.

That has been known since at least the 1990s with TD-Gammon beating the world champions in Backgammon. See eg http://incompleteideas.net/book/ebook/node108.html or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TD-Gammon

In a sense, classic chess engines do that, too: alpha-beta-search uses a very weak model (eg just checking for checkmate, otherwise counting material, or what have you) and search to generate a much stronger player. You can use that to generate data for training a better model.
by strogonoff | 2025-07-05 09:14:34+00:00
This might come from childhood and problematic praise patterns. You can grow to both crave praise and surprise, but at the same time when you get it not really value it. You might be interested to do impressive work as play when you don’t know how it will pan out, but if you don’t feel like it is interesting enough then you are demotivated.

I think it is important to be able to strategise, especially if you can delegate parts of the work. If you cannot delegate, there needs to be a balance with capacity for grunt work. One way to address it perhaps is learning to get in the zone and enjoy ongoing work as a process. Unfortunately, sometimes it is hard to snap out of big picture view and get to it.
by gxd | 2025-07-05 09:14:41+00:00
This is cool story! My uni's lab was all SGIs, IBM Risc 6000s and Sun workstations.

But I visited the lab for the first time in 25 years last week and everything got replaced by cheap PCs... :(

The 90s was perhaps the last gasp of high end, branded PCs. Man, these were some good looking computers. Try keeping your SGI in good shape, perhaps it will find its way to a museum one day.
by PeterStuer | 2025-07-05 09:14:46+00:00
Next up: Roadrunners!

Honestly, as a curiosum and token wildlife insert I get it. Bit like zoo animals.

But I'm not sure coyotes and mega cities are a good mariage. I see people mentioning rat controll, but imagine the size of the coyote population you would need to make even a small dent in that.
by akmarinov | 2025-07-05 09:14:52+00:00
Yeah - that’s the hard part now - dialing things down to eliminate the divergent paths the AI can take to implement what you want.

You can tell it “implement feature X” and it’ll go and do whatever’s easiest for it, often something dumb, that’s when people usually think “it’s dumb, won’t replace devs” and give up. Or you can nail down your requirements by talking to it and describing what you’re looking for, often it comes back with things you hadn’t considered or ways of doing things you didn’t know. Then just tell it “implement this SDD” and watch it one shot it in an hour or so.

There’s also pain points - some languages like Swift have changed so often and there’s little open source code to train on out there, so it’s on the worse side if you do iOS development.

It’s a new skill that needs working at, but in the end your output is significantly increased.
by strogonoff | 2025-07-05 09:15:57+00:00
Some people grow to both crave praise but also when they get it not really value it; they want people to be always surprised at cool stuff they can do but are not motivated to do boring uninteresting work. This may be accompanied by one or more of: perfectionism, narcissism, rejection anxiety, etc.

I suspect this might have to do with praise patterns in childhood.
by AdriaanvRossum | 2025-07-05 09:16:03+00:00
They use LibreOffice, which is open-source. [0] That suite is part of the The Document Foundation [1] which headquarters are in Berlin, Germany. How is this related to Russia?

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LibreOffice

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Document_Foundation
by dataflow | 2025-07-05 09:16:41+00:00
My impression as a total outsider here is that most (all?) other filesystems I'm aware of are either more mature - and generally not in active feature development - or they are not as popular, limiting the damage. Is this inaccurate?

I will also say that bcachefs's selling point - and probably a major reason people are so excited for it - is amount of effort it puts into avoiding data corruption. Which tells you something about the perceived quality of other filesystems on Linux. Which means that saying "other filesystems seem fine with the rules" misses the very fact that people have seen too much data corruption with other filesystems and want something that prioritizes it higher.
by avianlyric | 2025-07-05 09:17:18+00:00
> I think we are starting to see the squeeze from the big players.

I’m not convinced that these price increases represent an attempt to squeeze more profit out of a saturated market.

To me they look an awful lot like people realising that the sheer compute cost associated with modern models makes the historical zero-marginal cost model of software impossible. API calls to LLM models have far more in common with making calls to EC2 or Lambda for compute, than they do a standard API calls for SaSS.

A lot of early LLM based business models seemed to assume that the historical near zero-marginal cost of delivery for software would somehow apply to hosted LLM models which clearly isn’t the case.

You mix that in with rising datacenter costs, driven by lack of available electricity infrastructure to meet their demands, plus everyone trying to grab as much LLM land as possible, which requires more datacenters, more faster. And the result is rapidly increasing base costs for compute. Which we’re now seeing reflected in LLM pricing.

For me the thing that stands out about LLMs, is that their compute costs are easily 100-10000x greater per API call than a traditional SaSS API call. That fact alone should be enough for people to realise that the historically bottomless VC money that normal funds this stuff, isn’t quite a bottomless as it needs to be to meaningfully subsidise consumer pricing.
by eru | 2025-07-05 09:18:57+00:00
NP hard isn't much of a problem, because the levels are fairly small, and instances are not chosen to be worst case hard but to be entertaining for humans to solve.

SMT/SAT solvers or integer linear programming can get you pretty far. Many classic puzzle games like Minesweeper are NP hard, and you can solve any instance that a human would be able to solve in their lifetime fairly quickly on a computer.
by AnthonyMouse | 2025-07-05 09:19:30+00:00
Data centers are a pretty good match for nuclear because they run 24/7 and use a fairly constant amount of power. Solar is cheap in terms of amortized price per kWh but then you need some other solution to supply power at night or when it's cloudy, and the price of that has to be paid on top of the cost of solar.

Meanwhile nuclear costs what it does in significant part because the number of new plants is low which requires the cost of designing new reactors etc. to be amortized over fewer plants. But if you build more of them that changes.
by empathy_m | 2025-07-05 09:20:06+00:00
Hey hey, maybe it will help job stability.

Gergely Orosz, whose writing is influential in tech spheres and fun to read, has been a loud proponent of the theory that TCJA's elimination of the immediate expense of R&D research cost was the skeleton key explaining technology sector layoffs.

It seems to me to that many technology-industry trends are driven by vibes:

* People seem to love reading articles in any kind of media source about their company's products and are remarkably credulous of them / influenced by their content. Not just PR generating roundup reports of media coverage, this is also engineers and leaders who follow any coverage of their firms quite closely.

* There really does seem to be a sort of contagion effect with layoffs where, once one firm began doing it, everyone did (layoffs.fyi has a lot of data supporting this kind of hypothesis)

* Among founders and engineering leaders, there does seem to be a common set of ideas - not just the group-chat consensus that helped kill SVB, but just an overall whisper network of facts that everyone knows is true - which guide their choices.

Overall it seems reasonable for software-industry employees to hope a narrative takes hold like "we had to lay off lots of people because their headcount didn't pencil out during the annual FP&A cycle under the new TCJA R&D rules, but now that the new law has restored immediate R&D expensing the formula is going to make the opaque headcount number higher, and jobs will be more stable". The idea might even become true if enough people believe it.

Personally I think the layoffs are better explained by another phenomenon, superpersuasion from AI. (My niche view is that the first superpersuader success story was when the chatbots convinced business leaders to reallocate resources to buying more GPUs and LLM tokens and lower investment in the rest of their lines of business.)
by klabb3 | 2025-07-05 09:20:31+00:00
If you work at FAANG and relocate from NYC/SF to a smaller satellite office within the US, you can take a large pay cut. Unless things have changed in the last few years, companies usually pay location-based market rate. The lines are blurred with remote work - which market are you really a part of? But there is nothing magical that separates within the US from outside.
by bravesoul2 | 2025-07-05 09:21:03+00:00
I think there is game theory at play. I don't think Google for example is leaving money on the table. They hire worldwide of course but they are not swapping US for cheaper countries on mass and it must be for a good reason. Maybe it's a missed opportunity and some YC company dominates the new arbitrage. Who knows! I think I like the soil analogy. Moving the palm tree to another spot is risky if it's doing well in its current soil.
by yxhuvud | 2025-07-05 09:21:06+00:00
You don't challenge them by pretending they don't exist. That only make you look like an asshole.

The proper way here would have been two pull requests, one with all the bugfixes, and one with the new feature with a cover letter motivating why an exception should happen. And if this happens often enough with sufficiently good backing motivations, then he may be able to convince people.
by jorvi | 2025-07-05 09:21:58+00:00
Its very much a gendered thing. If you have lots of female (online) friends and late night topics with them ended up trending spicy, you might hear of AO3.

FWIW the vast majority of writing on there is decidedly mediocre. There is also an even more inferior alternative called Wattpad.

Funnily enough you learn that in general we aren't all that different in our tastes, it's just that what men like to watch, women like to read / imagine.

Edit: to paint the picture, this[0] was sent to me a while back :-)

[0]https://www.tiktok.com/@alexarowe11/video/746846214634761757...
by rorads | 2025-07-05 09:22:03+00:00
I think it’s fundamentally about context management and business model. Claude Code is expensive because it will happily put very large volumes into context because Anthropic are paid by the token. Cursor makes the bet that it can pay less per token whilst giving you enough value to still make margins on your $20 per month (assuming you’re using their default models).

This all becomes very clear when you do something that feels like magic in Claude Code and then run /cost and see you’ve blown through $10 in a single hour long session. Which is honestly worth it for me.
by kragen | 2025-07-05 09:22:32+00:00
I don't use an exchange, and the mining pools (which are not cartels) cannot block a transaction, only delay it until a different pool mines a block, typically ten minutes later. I don't think this sort of intervention by a pool has ever been observed.

The stablecoins you mention are arguably more liquid than Bitcoin, but, except for DAI, they're issued by central-bank-like institutions such as Binance and Coinbase. You're right that they're not officially central banks, but that just means you get all the drawbacks of central banks without the advantages.