MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by throw0101c | 2025-07-25 21:21:52+00:00
> FWIW, while the instinctive response here will be that this is a monopolistic and anti-consumer play, the reality is that these companies share almost zero routes.

And cable companies also don't have overlapping territory, so from the consumer point of view it did not reduce competition. But from the 'other side' when there are fewer ISPs then tech companies can be squeezed because there are fewer paths to eye-balls overall and each path has more influence because instead of two ISPs have 10% of Netflix customers, now one has 20%:

* https://qz.com/256586/the-inside-story-of-how-netflix-came-t...

Similarly with Amazon and books: while cheap consumer prices may look great, from the book publishers' perspective there's a choke point to readers, and so now the publishers have to consolidate to get market power over Amazon.

And if this goes through, do you think the other Class Is will sit around?

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._Class_I_railroads

CSX is mostly east of the Mississippi, while BNSF is west: what about that kind of merger? Or CN or CP doing the same thing?
by Karrot_Kream | 2025-07-25 21:22:17+00:00
The rebuttal is very simple. I'll try and make it a bit less emotionally charged and clear even if your original opinion did not appear to me to go through the same process:

"While some may use the tool irresponsibly, others will not, and therefore there's no need to restrict the tool. Society shouldn't handicap the majority to accommodate the minority."

You can choose to not engage with this critique but calling it a "false dichotomy" is in poor form. If anything, it makes me feel like you're not willing to entertain disagreement. You state that you want to start a discussion by expressing your opinion but I don't see a discussion here. I observe you expressing your opinion and dismissing criticism of that opinion as false.
by q3k | 2025-07-25 21:22:25+00:00
Apple device innards are made to appeal to people who have no idea about hardware engineering / repair. For the rest of us the design just screams wankery.

No one who has practical experience wants to deal with black solder mask, adhesives, non-uniform screw sizes / driver kinds, lack of repair docs, proprietary ICs and underdesigned charge circuits.

A macbook's innards isn't a beautiful piece of wood. It's a gaudy epoxy river pour with embedded 24 carat gold flakes that has no business being there.
by rjray | 2025-07-25 21:22:39+00:00
I've been a modeler since very very young. I took a break during college while getting my CS degree, but was drawn back into it when I learned that there were local clubs (IPMS/USA chapters) where I could meet other like-minded people and learn how to up my game. I've been balancing this non-screen hobby with being a professional dev for about 35 years, now. It's a fantastic way to relax and take my mind off of code.
by twoodfin | 2025-07-25 21:23:09+00:00
Wow, no idea highlights existed. Glad you used this opportunity to …uhh… highlight it via this great post.

I was at MIT just before this switch, and treasure having gotten to take these deep dive courses, even if .002 and .003 kicked my ass.

6.004 (followed up by 6.033) is probably the course that really drove my career into systems dev.
by lupusreal | 2025-07-25 21:23:22+00:00
Great suggestion, very practical and well intentioned. On that note, I had another idea; toxic women should stop associating with men. They should take themselves off the dating apps and stop ruining the lives of any men that might be unfortunate enough to pair up with them. My suggestion is just as practical as your suggestion I think. The toxic women can self-identify and voluntarily exclude themselves just as well as the creepy men.
by ylee | 2025-07-25 21:23:45+00:00
>It was as formative of a moment as my 2nd Grade teacher showing us a really complex looking (at the time) rainbow flower in LOGO (she had one of few color Mac classic), and showing us it was simply the work of drawing the path of one petal, then repeating same “work” after changing two values (starting angle and color).

I also well remember the epiphany I felt while learning Logo in elementary school, at the moment I understood what recursion is. I don't think the fact that the language I have mostly written code in in recent years is Emacs Lisp is unrelated to the above moment.
by toast0 | 2025-07-25 21:24:45+00:00
AMT income happens when the option is exercised (vests and paid for), the difference between the value and the strike price is income at that time. The AMT cost basis is the value at that time ... or you can think of it as the strike price plus the amount of income.

At the same time, if it's an ISO option, there is no assessment of ordinary tax until the stock is disposed. If there's a merger and the proper forms are followed, you can be issued stock from the acquirer that retains the basis (the strike price) of the original shares. If the forms are not followed, the acquisition is a taxable disposition.

There's a credit for the difference between AMT tax and ordinary tax on ISOs, but it can take many years for that to fully work out, and you have to have paid the AMT in the meantime.

Early exercise with 83(b) at time of grant (or while the value hasn't changed) or exercise-and-sell make the taxes make the taxes simplest, but tax simplicity isn't always the best strategy.
by throwaway3b03 | 2025-07-25 21:25:01+00:00
Except that the recycling ... cycle is not perfect. Far from it. I'd reckon maybe half of all lithium ends up in recycling. Other half probably ends up in the landfill. For instance, I picked up a broken ebike from the trash not long ago (Amsterdam). Battery still in it. Same goes for lots of smaller electronics.
by AnimalMuppet | 2025-07-25 21:25:03+00:00
Unfair? How is that unfair? If I built the track, then I own the track, and I decide what runs on the track. Anybody else thinking they have the right to run on it can get lost. A private railroad line is not an open-access situation. They'll carry your railroad car, but they'll do it in their train. Any argument otherwise is an argument against private ownership, which I view extremely skeptically.

(It's a little different in the case of commuter rail, where there's a contractual arrangement.)
by eqvinox | 2025-07-25 21:25:22+00:00
> The point is 240v at Household amps / current CAN kill you.

Deaths from electrocution are low in the US at 110V, but not massively higher at 230V; some 230V countries are lower in fact:

https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Age-adjusted-mortality-r...

(Says at bottom 0.63 for US)

Apparently eastern European electrons are more deadly though ;D

(... It's really all about safety culture.)

Also, that male/female split in the linked graph... wow.
by johnnyanmac | 2025-07-25 21:25:29+00:00
>If you want to fix this, you actually have to organize and go after the payment processors, because it's not going to be solved by writing essays in the comments or waiting for Steam to suddenly develop a spine.

Okay. If you have any wisdom or ideas, I'd love to hear them. But as is, this comment is about as effective as mine on fighting Visa/Mastercard. "Just come together and yell at Steam!"

I'm not opposed to activism, I'm ignorant of it. The big issue of the internet is that we are all scattered very wide and that makes it harder to collect ourselvves under one goal. And as of now, I'm a laid off tech worker (who doesn't live in SF) who has no real capital to contribute to such a cause. I feel powerless.
by simion314 | 2025-07-25 21:25:52+00:00
>One of the example games that was banned was “daddy twins incest BDSM” and similar titles.

Next you will ban games where you are killing people instead of focusing on real killers? I would prefer we have laws for what is legal and not let religious extremists decide what music we are allowed to listen, what type of books and games should we play, I guess there is no evidence they can bring to ban this content so they push their FUD around.

So please either make it illegal or stop focusing on virtual crimes, maybe focus on real crimes or use those money religious people have on helping real people.
by junto | 2025-07-25 21:26:21+00:00
These kinds of apps are already in existence across many cities in the world in the form of informal, invite-only WhatsApp and Telegram groups.

The problem is the demand is there for such groups and I see posts that range from, “this guy tried to get me to get in his car”, or “man exposed himself to me”, to “man has twice approached children at my child’s school” or “I was drugged and raped after meeting with X on Y dating app”.

Lots of sexual attackers are known to multiple women.

Fact is that in lots of countries rape kits don’t get processed, it’s hard to secure a conviction, many serial sex offenders walk free and many women don’t want to go through a reliving of their trauma in court.

As a result these kinds of groups are very useful, not just for women who are actively dating, but for women who are simply existing in day-to-day public life. We have a president and a supreme court judge who both have been accused of serious sex offenses and nothing happened.

Is there a chance that some man who has done nothing wrong, gets accused by a woman in these groups? Yes of course there is a chance that could happen, but many would prefer to not take the risk of dating someone that has been accused of being a sex offender and the vast majority of posts with confirmation by multiple women confirm that bias.

These groups help keep women safer than without them. There’s a good reason why many women just don’t date at all any more. Covid lockdowns reminded them that they don’t really need it and it’s more hassle than it’s worth.

Sadly the vast majority of men are fine (not all men), but not enough call out the bad and dangerous behavior of a minority of their friends and peers. Until that happens women will be drawn to these apps and groups to try to be safer and not be a part of a sex crime statistic.
by wmf | 2025-07-25 21:26:30+00:00
I've thought deeply about this topic but from the pro-suburbia side and I actually agree with the analogy. At a bare minimum if you want to be independent you need a domain which is ~$10/year. That's a small amount but it's already more than most people will pay. (IMO this is irrational if you're paying >$500/year for cellular service but I digress.) Good home servers like Helm (RIP) or Umbrel are $300+ upfront. A good NAS that can also self-host is even more. As you said, if your ISP sucks maybe you have to upgrade to "pro" broadband that's more expensive. Ultimately you're spending hundreds or thousands of dollars on a worse replacement for services that are already "free".

Self-hosting is like spending money putting a swimming pool in your backyard when you could walk to a public pool instead.
by throw0101c | 2025-07-25 21:26:33+00:00
> Monopoly? No.

How about oligopoly then.

If UP/NS happens, we're down from six to five Class Is (ignoring Amtrak):

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._Class_I_railroads

Then BNSF/CSX? Or CN or CP go after CSX? That's four.

Do we start seeing the acquiring of Class IIs?
by jrflowers | 2025-07-25 21:26:36+00:00
> Precautionary principle should always prevail.

This makes sense. If anybody at any point thinks that something might be bad, it should immediately and permanently be prohibited for everyone. We don’t need a mechanism to check this because people are never mistaken or misled, and there is no such thing as a bad actor.

Since the principle should always prevail, it applies to people as well. If anybody thinks that another person could do harm in the future, they should be allowed to kill them in order to protect society from harm.

A system where the only rule is “every person gets to make the rules for everyone else” isn’t the stupidest imaginable thing because
by AnimalMuppet | 2025-07-25 21:26:51+00:00
No, they're suggesting something more along the lines of Standard Oil being required to refine anyone's oil in their refinery, or carry it in their pipelines. But the one suggesting it didn't offer to let anyone stay in their house, and to me that's the same issue. Does the owner of private property get to control access and use, or not?

You say that the railroad is a business, not a private residence. All right, does Home Depot have to let Lowe's use part of their floor space? No, they don't.
by jmyeet | 2025-07-25 21:26:55+00:00
Private railroads are a mistake. Let's see what the private railroad industry has done.

The railroads kept reducing their workforce to get an uptick in profitability, so much so that there wasn't enough spare capacity for railroad workers to get paid sick leave of any kind. The railroad workforce were taking industrial action to get paid sick leave. What happened? Congress stepped in to use legislation to end a labor dispute for essential workers to side with the company. Oh and this was under Biden. As an aside, a later deal was made to give them a handful of paid sick days, quietly.

If the railroad caved to 100% of the union's demands it would've cost 6% of the company's profits. Not revenue. Profits.

The other is an industry wide effort called Precision Scheduled Railroads ("PSR"). Basically this means having trains with twice as many carriages and skipping safety chcecks because that costs money.

There are over 1000 train derailments a year. Most of these aren't a big deal. Others are like East Palestine, Ohio a few years ago, which caused a toxic spill in a populated area, something that continues to be an issue [1]. A lot of toxic chemicals are transported by rail. What was insane was the media didn't report on the East Palestine derailment for a week to 10 days despite there being a black toxic plume that could be seen from space. They were finally embarrassed into covering it by social media, particularly Tiktok.

All railroad companies do to maintain and increase profits is cut costs, pretty much like every other company. That means suppressing wages, skimping on maintenance and safety and not investing in fixing anything.

[1]: https://www.npr.org/2024/02/05/1228772709/east-palestine-tra...
by ac29 | 2025-07-25 21:27:13+00:00
> Doesn't a DB9 connector include all the DB25 RS-232 handshaking lines

Handshaking yes, but not all potential RS232 signals, of which there are 11.

I work with RS232 frequently and even CTS/RTS is rare to use. Never personally seen anything use DTR, DCD, DSR, or RI though I know they did see historical use.
by relaxing | 2025-07-25 21:27:47+00:00
of course home invasions happen, but they’re rare. and the number involving guns is much smaller. look up the statistics instead of getting scared watching the news.

so a police officer shows up at your door. you’re going to greet them with a gun drawn? that will get you killed.

i do own a firearm, but i don’t walk around with it like a cowboy. and i discourage others because of all the risks mentioned.
by gs17 | 2025-07-25 21:27:57+00:00
Yes, at least back in 2019, from the link:

> However, worldwide fraud networks have recently shifted to using CS:GO keys to liquidate their gains. At this point, nearly all key purchases that end up being traded or sold on the marketplace are believed to be fraud-sourced. As a result we have decided that newly purchased keys will not be tradeable or marketable.

Many users still suspect it happens, although it's hard to prove.
by anonym29 | 2025-07-25 21:28:22+00:00
"Protecting women" is an incoherent excuse for pressuring websites to pull romantic games that feature consensual, loving, respectful homosexual male-male relationships, with no women even present in the game.

The real motivations seemingly have nothing to do with protecting women, which appears to simply be a palatable facade for the true intention to suppress all depictions of sexuality, including the depictions that offer good-faith representation of historically marginalized groups.
by scubbo | 2025-07-25 21:29:08+00:00
> exposing our services to the public internet

You yourself have hand-waved away an important part - security. It's not (just) about the friction of signup (though, I'll get to that later) - it's the fact that you'd be utterly insane, as an individual developer without a full-time security team, to expose a self-hosted application to the Internet.

And sure, you can give them a login to your VPN, but that doesn't negate the next part...

> and forcing our friends to signup for our weird app > in the standards, OIDC overcomes this

It's not the signup that's the hurdle. It's the fragmentation. Sure, if you implement OIDC, your friends can sign up to your photo app. And they can sign up to Sam's, and Joe's, and the app of the cute bakery on the street, and a couple others. What then? The whole value of a network is that the components are interconnected and can intercommunicate. If I have to upload my photos seventeen times to seventeen different partitioned applications for my various social groups to see them, I'm just as likely to not bother.

Fediverse-like ideas go some way towards addressing that, but they don't seem to be in any state of usability for anyone non-technical (I say that as someone who was using Mastodon as my only social media for the last couple of years)
by WalterBright | 2025-07-25 21:29:25+00:00
I had a job wire-wrapping circuit boards in college.

I expended effort to lay out the wires so they formed a neat pattern. Why spend time doing that? It made it easy to check for errors in wiring, as then the pattern would be disrupted. The end result was I almost never made a wirewrap mistake, and the work was appreciated.

I also soldered components on, and also took care to orient the resisters all the same way, and align everything neatly. I'd use needle nose pliers to bend the leads just so, too. It also made visual error checking fast and easy. Again, no errors.
by chrisg23 | 2025-07-25 21:29:28+00:00
I wonder how many gems like this https://archive.org/details/youtube-moXX8lbnmHs that could have been saved have been lost. (Obviously this one is saved, for now.)

This is not to disparage the tremendous work done and being done by the IA, it's more of me lamenting the trend of our society and societies to mentally babysit people lest their mind gets exposed to something bad, with the implicit assumption that adult humans can't be trusted to see some stupid bs and react with "that was some stupid bs. I am moving it into the stupid bs bucket of things I know about".
by elseless | 2025-07-25 21:29:42+00:00
Sure. You can think of a (simple) traditional CPU as executing instructions in time, one-at-a-time[1] — it fetches an instruction, decodes it, performs an arithmetic/logical operation, or maybe a memory operation, and then the instruction is considered to be complete.

The Efficient architecture is a CGRA (coarse-grained reconfigurable array), which means that it executes instructions in space instead of time. At compile time, the Efficient compiler looks at a graph made up of all the “unrolled” instructions (and data) in the program, and decides how to map it all spatially onto the hardware units. Of course, the graph may not all fit onto the hardware at once, in which case it must also be split up to run in batches over time. But the key difference is that there’s this sort of spatial unrolling that goes on.

This means that a lot of the work of fetching and decoding instructions and data can be eliminated, which is good. However, it also means that the program must be mostly, if not completely, static, meaning there’s a very limited ability for data-dependent branching, looping, etc. to occur compared to a CPU. So even if the compiler claims to support C++/Rust/etc., it probably does not support, e.g., pointers or dynamically-allocated objects as we usually think of them.

[1] Most modern CPUs don’t actually execute instructions one-at-a-time — that’s just an abstraction to make programming them easier. Under the hood, even in a single-core CPU, there is all sorts of reordering and concurrent execution going on, mostly to hide the fact that memory is much slower to access than on-chip registers and caches.
by marsten | 2025-07-25 21:29:44+00:00
I attribute the curriculum shift to something slightly different, which is the changing perception of CS as a career.

When I was in college in the late 1980s, CS was not perceived as the moneymaking career it is today. Accordingly the kids who went into CS were typically the nerds and hackers who truly loved the field.

Many kids now perceive CS as a safe, lucrative career option akin to becoming a doctor or lawyer. It attracts many students who are smart but perhaps not as intrinsically excited about the field. The universities adjusted their curricula to what these students care about: Less beautiful theory, and more practical training.

A similar thing happened in statistics. At one time it was hardcore stats nerds. Now "data science" has brought a ton more people into the field and the teaching methods have changed dramatically.
Show HN: Intelligent UAT with auto-generated test cases
by buildinext | 2025-07-25 21:29:48+00:00
After years of frustration dealing with slow, costly, and error-prone manual User Acceptance Testing (UAT) at fintechs, I built Quell—-a platform that auto-generates and executes UAT test cases using cross-functional AI experts (e.g. compliance, UX, operations, QA).

Quell integrates seamlessly into workflows (Jira, Linear, GitHub), cuts down manual UAT process time by ~80%. I’m excited to get your feedback and answer any questions.

Try it free here: quellit.ai Alex alex@quellit.ai
by BhavdeepSethi | 2025-07-25 21:30:18+00:00
I don't believe they did. This acquisition was by Flipkart, the poster child startup in India, who had a very high bar for hiring. They wanted to interview the non-founders to make sure they met the standard. The founders said you get all or you get none. To be fair, it was a small team of 6-8 employees, so I doubt Flipkart cared. :)
by collingreen | 2025-07-25 21:30:26+00:00
I don't have a dog in this fight but I think the counter argument was a terrible straw man. Op said it's too dangerous to put in general hands. Treating that like "protect the incompetent from themselves and punish everyone in the process" is badly twisting the point. A closer oversimplification is "protect the public from the incompetents".

In my mind a direct, good faith rebuttal would address the actual points - either disagree that the worst usage would lead to harm of the public or make a point (like the op tees up) that risking the public is one of worthy tradeoffs of freedom.