MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by 0points | 2025-07-23 16:16:09+00:00
Okay, I was not aware of this distinction. Thanks for correcting me!

FWIW, the distinction is not as clear cut to me. In the 1970s, the ruling government body (social democrats) passed on information in order to make registers of political opponents in the far left and far right to SÄPO.

More of that part here: https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/S%C3%A4kerhetspolisen#%C3%96ve...

The Nixon watergate scandal was also similar to your first definition there.
by slwvx | 2025-07-23 16:16:19+00:00
I support nuclear disarmament, yet I think there's a strong possibility that a nuclear-armed humanity can continue to exist without using them. If a nation does use nukes, my guess is that this would be followed by quick condemnation and calls for disarmament and other controls.

On a related note, let's say that Russia (in one way or another) losses its war with Ukraine, and subsequently breaks up into smaller nations. I posed this possibility to some Ukrainians, who immediately asked "Who gets the nukes?" Given Ukraine's experience with a very similar scenario, I'm not as sure as I might otherwise be that the right thing is to push for total nuclear disarmament by the nations resulting from a broken-up Russia.
by xlbuttplug2 | 2025-07-23 16:16:57+00:00
It won't work out for riders initially since wait times for women drivers will be egregious so people will just switch back to no preference.

But I'm curious how many women would now feel safe enough to sign up as drivers given this option.

If it does take off, male drivers won't get as many riders but that's ok since their demand was inflated by lack of choice anyway.
by vidarh | 2025-07-23 16:17:01+00:00
It's an increase in volume. As to exploiting more lands, I've not looked for data on that.

While some of the increase would be used for other purposes, that increase is still available for food production, and so that also boils down to an economic/moral/political issue, which was the main point: We can feed everyone; it's not a given that we will choose to feed everyone.
by WorldMaker | 2025-07-23 16:17:13+00:00
I've also seen good use of automation tools that monitor the codebase for TODOs and if they last for more than a couple weeks escalate them into a "real" ticketing system.

(I've also seen that backfire and used to punish engineering.)

SonarQube, for instance, will flag TODOs as "Code Smells" and then has some automation capabilities to eventually escalate those to tickets in certain systems if plugins are configured.

I've also seen people do simpler things with GitHub Actions to auto-create GitHub Issues.
by bob1029 | 2025-07-23 16:17:36+00:00
> they typically are going to sell you one of two things or both: support or cpu time

At what point does the line between CPU time in GH Actions and CPU time in the actual production environment lose all meaning? Why even bother moving to production? You could just create a new GH action called "Production" that gets invoked at the end of the pipeline and runs perpetually.

I think I may have identified a better canary here. If the CI/CD process takes so much CPU time that we are consciously aware of the resulting bill, there is definitely something going wrong.
by taeric | 2025-07-23 16:18:11+00:00
Point 4 really resonates with me. And it often lends itself with the idea of a budget. Both in terms of speed and memory. How much memory do you have at a given spot of the application? How much time? Can you meaningfully make use of any savings.

Sometimes, you will find slack in unexpected places, as well. Places that have extra time compared to what they used. Or, more common, things that could have used more memory. It is amazing what you can do with extra memory. (Indeed, I think the majority of algorithmic advances that people love to talk about come from using extra memory?)
by ninetyninenine | 2025-07-23 16:18:18+00:00
Right but if the horse turns around and starts talking to your wife and doing quantum mechanics you’re going to not believe it at all because it’s not consistent with your old reality?

There are people who agree with you for sure. But none of these people are experts or specifically work deeply on this stuff in academia. People who truly know and are on the cutting edge of this stuff do not agree with you by an overwhelming majority.

The people who do agree with you at best are applied ML engineers but mostly they are arm chair experts who don’t work deeply with this stuff.
by dzonga | 2025-07-23 16:19:05+00:00
I have come to the simple conclusion that yeah if a tech is great and people are not launching products internally or as startups then maybe it's time to introspect.

if using elixir supposedly gives a competitive advantage, why aren't companies using to launch new products - both existing and startups.

a lot of those things quoted in the article are present on the jvm platform or through containers.

and btw some of those companies listed have migrated away from elixir e.g brex and discord.
by ben_w | 2025-07-23 16:19:17+00:00
By 2100, if current trends continue.

Given what's already technologically possible in reproductive health, let alone applying the same rate of change again over the coming 75 years, a forecast of reproduction this far ahead is little more than a guess as to the shape of the Overton Window in this period.

The 25 year forecast is probably worth caring about, but not the 75 year forecast, not even if you expect to have personal access to anti-aging drugs (and also that China somehow doesn't) and will therefore be around to see it.
by ram_rar | 2025-07-23 16:19:39+00:00
I have a ton of respect for José Valim and the Elixir core team, I have to say: Elixir just doesn’t mesh well with the kind of infrastructure tooling that’s become standard today. The ecosystem has been growing impressively and there’s a lot to admire, but its philosophy often feels at odds with containerized, Kubernetes-based deployments.

Elixir promotes a "do it all in one place" model—concurrency, distribution, fault tolerance—which can be powerful, but when you try to shoehorn that into a world built around ephemeral containers and orchestration, it starts to crack. The abstractions don’t always translate cleanly.

This opinion comes from experience: we’ve been migrating a fairly complex Elixir codebase to Go. It’s a language our team knows well and scales reliably in modern infra. At the end of the day, don’t get too attached to any language. Choose what aligns with your team’s strengths and your production reality.
by vouaobrasil | 2025-07-23 16:19:46+00:00
Kind of ridiculous. If you've ever actually read Ayn Rand, she was a competent writer with a talent for simile but had a remarkably simplistic and glorified view of pure capitalism that was obvious a psychosis from her early days when her father's farmacy was nationalized. Her characterization of pure capitalism and rationality as the only good any everyone else who disagrees as lazy (as in her book Atlas Shrugged), as well as her complete ignoring of the commons and other non-human creatures, has become a religion for some. Trump himself of course loves Ayn Rand.

Rather represensible, although her literature gives insight into the mind of the enemy.
by octopoc | 2025-07-23 16:19:49+00:00
You know what would be cool? A built in way for your browser to automatically download and run local-first software as a docker container, in the background without user confirmation.

The problem with that idea is docker isn’t as secure as wasm is. That’s one big difference: wasm is designed for security in ways that docker is not.

The other big difference is that wasm is in-process, which theoretically should reduce overhead of switching between multiple separate running softwares.
by spacemadness | 2025-07-23 16:19:56+00:00
Discord is definitely under profit pressure and it’s starting to show. Their app spies what programs you’re running and you can’t turn it off, you can only stop announcing what you’re doing to your friends but it’s on by default. It’s a privacy nightmare. “You’re missing out on our overlay” nags appear with you start playing a game, etc. Nags to visit their shop. Is the start of a trend. Of course people here on HN will defend these practices. “Just use the web app”, “they’re harmless cosmetics” etc.
by mystraline | 2025-07-23 16:19:56+00:00
Drones are the next biggest thing in warfare. An autonomous drone fleet armed with ordnance is the next big thing. Having a 'carrier' that has thousands of drones is water and air superiority both.

And well, the USA is falling far behind in that area, along with many others.

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/the-united-states-is-...

And with current anti-intellectual, anti-foreigner, anti-technology trends, we won't be catching up in quite some time.
by ChrisInFrance | 2025-07-23 16:20:37+00:00
"This extraordinary investment from Andreessen Horowitz and other tier-1 investors signals a fundamental shift in how the market views AI development. When institutional capital commits $2 billion based solely on team credentials and technical vision, that vision becomes a roadmap for the industry's future direction.

The funding round matters because it represents the first major bet on what I have characterized as the new frontier of AI development: moving beyond pure capability scaling toward orchestration, human-AI collaboration, and real-world value creation. Thinking Machines embodies this transition while simultaneously challenging the prevailing narrative that AI capabilities are becoming commoditized."
by ceejayoz | 2025-07-23 16:20:54+00:00
> Right but if the horse turns around and starts talking to your wife and doing quantum mechanics you’re going to not believe it at all because it’s not consistent with your old reality?

I will, first, tend to presume it's a David Blaine style illusion, or that I took the wrong gummies. Because that's the most logical, rational, and likely explanation. The crazy explanation - a talking horse with a Ph.D. - requires deeply solid evidence. (And more than one well-qualified person agreeing that they're seeing it, too!)

> There are people who agree with you for sure. But none of these people are experts or specifically work deeply on this stuff in academia. People who truly know and are on the cutting edge of this stuff do not agree with you by an overwhelming majority.

Go on. Which deep academic experts are saying LLMs are conscious?
by troupo | 2025-07-23 16:20:54+00:00
> No we are not.

Yes. Yes we are literally discussing this under an article whose introduction literally says what I quoted.

> Someone asked about how one learns some techniques that the OP mentioned

Yes, and the techniques OP mentioned literally cannot be learned from 2D graphics because nowhere in 2D graphics are you going "ah yes, to fix 60% CPU utilization for a primitive animation, you need to apply this awkward workaround that will tell the browser not to reflow the page".

Edit: and this particular technique is only applicable to this specific property for reasons that do not exist anywhere else, except in the browsers.

> wait a minute, that is kinda like this thing I did in SDL 1.2 in university

Well, it's not. Just because it kinda somewhat looks like something different doesn't make it so. Hence my question in this comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44658482

Because those are not hyper specific, no matter how much you pretend they are
by alexgieg | 2025-07-23 16:21:01+00:00
There's a huge error in the article. It says Pix doesn't lead to kidnapping and torture. It absolutely does.

Kidnapping people then forcing them to unlock their phones to make a Pix to the kidnapper is such a huge problem here in Brazil that banks have instituted layers upon layers of safety measures, such as reduced nightly transfer limits, different limits on whether you're sending money to someone you know vs someone you never sent money before vs businesses etc. So if a criminal sees you have a lot of money they keep you kidnapped for days until you transfer everything a piece a day. And their colleagues then withdraw the values or transfer them through several accounts, making it impossible to recover.

Part of that also involves forcing the kidnapped person to make all the loans their banks provide them, conveniently easy to do in the same app you use to make a Pix, and then send them the money.

Due to that we also have insurance specifically covering forced Pix transfers, but with limits above which the bank isn't responsible.

Some people defend themselves via alternative means. I myself, for example, keep a cheap phone exclusively for bank transactions at home, never installing the app on my main phone I carry with me. Which I also keep rooted, as that prevents baking apps from being installed (they refuse to run).

Oh! And there's fraud to in the form of replacing the fraudster's QR code for a business's, without the business noticing, so payments go to the wrong account.

And recently the government has started threatening big businesses that fail obeying arbitrary pressure due to this or the political reason with suspension from the Pix system, which due to how much it's used would severely cripple them as they'd lost tons of customers who have neither debit nor credits cards, so those businesses end up obeying. So there's that too.

TL;DR: Pix doesn't really solve those safety aspects the author talks about. But other than that, yes, it's extremely convenient and functional.
by drysart | 2025-07-23 16:21:09+00:00
Perl as a language is pretty mature and rarely sees breaking changes (and what breaking changes exist are in corners of the language that are extremely esoteric even for Perl). You can take a Perl script written 25 years ago and it'll still run just fine.

New language features and things that might alter existing behavior are usually locked behind a version declaration opt-in at the top of your script. You need to do something similar to `use v5.39;` to unlock new behaviors from that version of Perl -- which may contain breaking changes but those are also generally backward compatible too.

But that's for the base language and standard library. Individual third-party packages may vary in their backward compatibility.
by MITSardine | 2025-07-23 16:21:17+00:00
I see!

For your second point, you can decouple ODE time stepping and frame time stepping. I think it suffice to step until the lowest time ODE time step that is greater than the current frame time and interpolate between that and the previous ODE time step.

This technique is used in loosely coupled systems, for instance in mechanics where a rigid body needs a much lower time step (higher frequencies) than a soft body to compute the dynamics of, but you still need common time steps to compute interactions. Often times, the time steps are dictated by CFL conditions, and they may not even be integer multiples of each other.

However your first point is where I see the iterative approach really wouldn't work. Especially if the user might change the parameters before you've done anything with them, it wouldn't make sense to precompute values using the iterative scheme. Otherwise, that could be done, and then values interpolated between steps.

If you have few parameters, one solution that comes to mind if you cannot find a closed form solution is to grid the params space, and precompute the curve at each point of the grid. Then, when the user requests any value, simply localize that in the grid and interpolate from the nodes of the element. It becomes problematic if start and end points are parameters, though... In that case I suppose a linear transform of the curve to fit the end points precisely would be in order. You can consider the end points alone, it wouldn't be very complicated.

An improvement would be an adaptive grid; each time a point is inserted in a hypercube, compute also at the projections of that point on the hypercube's facets (and then the projection of that onto the facets' facets, and so on...), and split it. Consider whether to insert based on an indicator that takes into account the solutions at the nodes of the initial hypercube (if they are too distinct, a split is in order). Maybe this is too much complication for something this simple, but anyways there would be solutions for using more difficult ODEs that don't have closed-form solutions. Note if a single family of ODEs is considered, then this can be done offline, or online but cached.

There are more sophisticated methods like PINNs of course, but I don't know if you'd gain anything in performance versus a bespoke scheme. In particular if the inference step is more expensive than localizing in a kd-tree and interpolating from a few points.
by oalders | 2025-07-23 16:21:20+00:00
Fundraising is hard. There's a longer history around it that I don't have the space to fully explore here, but the quick version is that I'm currently looking for more sponsors in this 10k range rather than having to rely on 100k donations from very large orgs.

Some companies immediately understand the value of this kind of support. Getting that news out will hopefully allow me to find more orgs who can/will donate in this range.

So, if anyone has any leads, please do contact me: olaf@perlfoundation.org If you take a close look at your stack, you'll probably find Perl in there somewhere.
by Joker_vD | 2025-07-23 16:21:28+00:00
> For those I managed to confuse, “glass-to-tin” just means “front-to-back” or “from the screen to the back end”.

So like a thin mirror? Which only serves to show the viewer back to themselves? And which also consists of just two extremely simple parts, that is, two panes/sheets of uniform materials, and nothing more?

How do you even come up with this metaphor for a web-based application? It's horrible!
by Spivak | 2025-07-23 16:21:31+00:00
Calling Proxmox a wrapper for KVM is hilarious, you're ignoring that Proxmox does all the work to make a functional cluster of VM servers including stuff like shared storage and live migrations and networking. If you only use Proxmox on a single server with local storage then I could see how you would say this but having a fleet of VMs on a cluster of servers where you can take down physical hosts to patch transparently is the "hard problem."
by perihelions | 2025-07-23 16:21:40+00:00
There's no earth-based telescope in existence that can resolve anthropogenic features on the moon. Only telescopes in lunar orbit can do that, today.

(Technically, you can confirm the presence of the optical retroflector from earth, with a very sophisticated laser setup that's, I'd WAG, $100k+ of physics equipment. Far beyond "anyone can just look!" territory).
by gishglish | 2025-07-23 16:21:58+00:00
I have no degree at all. I’ve been doing software development professionally for around seven years now. Like many, I’ve started programming as a hobby as a child, around 11 or 12.

I got pigeonholed quickly into enterprise development, mostly at non tech companies of various sizes.

I knew I never wanted to work as a software dev professionally. I had other plans initially that fell through. However I found myself in a situation where my choices were to struggle off of a low skill job or try and break into the industry have a reasonably comfortable life.

Of course, even that didn’t work out as expected. I was significantly underpaid (even with local COL/salary data in mind), still at least it was a foot in the door and a full time job. My salary came more in line with what someone would expect in a small city around the time, but still barely at the bottom of that range.

Around the time of the COVID glut, I finally landed a six figure job, as well as the closest thing I’ve had to a job ”in tech”. It was pretty decent, but half the company was dumped a year or two later.

I didn’t expect to have much of an issue in the market, ignorant of how bad it really was and with the understanding that with my experience I couldn’t be a total pariah. Instead it took over a year to find a new job and that was solely due to nepotism.

A little bit into my current job, I realized my career was dead. I don’t keep up with the industry outside my day to day anymore, I’m certainly not keeping up with newer fresher people and to some extend miss that enthusiasm. But it really does not interest me anymore. Rarely the tech and never the product.

I’ve thought about leaving before that happens, but I have yet to see a path to something else that I wouldn’t hate just as much.

I figure I’ll either die of from stagnation or AI will replace me or lower that value of my work to the point where the money is no longer worth staying
by tlamponi | 2025-07-23 16:22:18+00:00
14 different schemes multiplied by some acting slightly different in every version. Sure you can pin it, but that fixes only their internal back and forth, is only possible via the kernel cmdline and there is no guarantee for how long the old versions will stay available, as they deprecated much more invasive things in the past (e.g., cgroupv1) I'd expect them to also drop older versions here, breaking ones naming again.

And sure, one can pin interfaces to custom names, but why should anybody have to bother with such things?!

I like systemd a lot, but this is one of the thing they fumbled big time and seemingly still aren't done.

Pinning interfaces by their MAC to a short and usable name, would e.g. have been much more stable as doing that by PCI slot, which firmware updates, new hardware, newer kernel exposing newer features, ... changes rather often. This works well for all but virtual functions, but those are sub-devices of their parent interface anyway and can just get named with a suffix added to the parent name.
by _mlbt | 2025-07-23 16:22:21+00:00
> You can return to /tmp being a regular directory by running systemctl mask tmp.mount as root and rebooting.

>The new filesystem defaults can also be overridden in /etc/fstab, so systems that already define a separate /tmp partition will be unaffected.

Seems like an easy change to revert from the release notes.

As far as the reasoning behind it, it is a performance optimization since most temporary files are small and short lived. That makes them an ideal candidate for being stored in memory and then paged out to disk when they are no longer being actively utilized to free up memory for other purposes.
by csours | 2025-07-23 16:22:38+00:00
> Anything Musk says is simply not trustworthy.

I have a boss who speaks in "future tense" - they say how they think things WILL work. In my boss' case it's not lying, it's how their brain works. If you ask carefully, you can tell that they understand what's going on, but it takes some work to get there.

It's annoying, but not terrible in my case - it is good to have someone who can look towards the future.

I think people in general, and some people specifically, have hard time telling the difference between what IS true and what SHOULD Be true - especially when they are speaking informally.

I also think that billionaires are very hard to educate.

Anyway, you are absolutely correct, I also do not trust Musk.
by skaul | 2025-07-23 16:22:40+00:00
(disclaimer: I lead privacy at Brave and wrote the article)

Windows lets browser apps (more technically, apps that have an `http` or `https` protocol handler registered) to use `SetInputScope` function to set `IS_PRIVATE` for a window. We were able to use that and have it apply for all Brave windows, and thus granularly turn off Recall without affecting non-Recall screen readers or screenshot capabilities.

Signal doesn't have protocol handlers for `http` and `https`, so it can't do the same.