MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by pentamassiv | 2025-07-19 23:00:58+00:00
You can use an electronic groupset as well. There are benefits to it. Shimano says it's not possible, but you can just connect the shift levers with a wire to the rear derailleurs [1]. They will not respond to wireless signals afterwards. I tried to do the replay attack and it failed. That way you get the best of both worlds.

[1] https://bettershifting.com/installation-guide/connect-12-spe...
by botro | 2025-07-19 23:01:36+00:00
I posted this on HN back in 2023, reposting now because I don't think this article goes far enough:

I’ll make the bold claim that the following industries / companies would not exist without the USPS:

The Airline Industry: In the early days of American aviation, air transportation was unproven and not financially viable, until the USPS built the necessary infrastructure and gave contracts to airlines to allow them financial feasibility… starting in 1918! [1]

Machine Learning: In 1989 Yann LeCun wrote his seminal paper “Backpropagation Applied to Handwritten ZIP Code Recognition”, which used the USPS’s data set and has today become the hello world of machine learning tasks. More importantly this is the first commercial or industrial application of machine learning. [2]

Netflix: Before Streaming became a thing, Netflix was shipping DVDs via the USPS. The Postal Service adapted its processes and equipment to make this financially feasible, supporting Netflix through its transition to streaming. [3]

Amazon: Early Amazon was only a book vendor, the USPS offered special rates for books that made it possible for Bezos to be profitable from his garage … in 1994, thus birthing the behemoth it is today. [4]

Chickens: okay, not really. But the USPS ships millions of pounds of live chickens and other animals each year! [5]

[1] https://www.history.com/news/us-aviation-airmail-passenger-f...

[2] http://yann.lecun.com/exdb/publis/pdf/lecun-89e.pdf

[3] https://www.zdnet.com/article/u-s-postal-service-to-netflix-...

[4] https://faq.usps.com/s/article/What-is-Media-Mail-Book-Rate

[5] https://pe.usps.com/text/pub52/pub52c5_008.htm
by recursivedoubts | 2025-07-19 23:02:20+00:00
Nothing magic about htmx or hypermedia: you still need to organize your code properly, and there are tasks for which it is not suited:

https://htmx.org/essays/when-to-use-hypermedia/

However, in many case, it can be much simpler architecture than alternative approaches:

https://htmx.org/essays/a-real-world-react-to-htmx-port/
by slt2021 | 2025-07-19 23:02:30+00:00
the problem is over time they erected a giant moat that is regulation and captive customer base.

I dont understand how anti-trust regulation lets Visa/MC duopoly exist (at least with current rates), they must be heaviest donors to politicians.

and once you understand how 2-3 big corporations establish oligopoly and engage in rent seeking, protected by mountains of regulations, and share some of their wealth with politicians - you understand how American extractive institutions work.

The only hope is some giant like Apple/Google completely unseat visa with their own secure payment solutions that gets around VISA/MC card system
by ChadNauseam | 2025-07-19 23:02:40+00:00
My interpretation of the post is that the rule is deeper than that. This is the most important part:

> Here is the most famous implication of this rule: Rust does not infer function signatures. If it did, changing the body of the function would change its signature. While this is convenient in the small, it has massive ramifications.

Many languages violate this. As another commenter mentioned, C++ templates are one example. Rust even violates it a little - lifetime variance is inferred, not explicitly stated.
by sundaeofshock | 2025-07-19 23:03:04+00:00
A rich eats three meals a day, just like everyone else. They may eat nicer food, but they do t consume that much more than the average person. Indeed, the rich tend to hoard their wealth, removing it from the economy while the average person spends most of the money they earn.

Taxing the billionaires is a net plus for any economy.
by leagreeer | 2025-07-19 23:03:10+00:00
In every different zig project you have to read the source code to see how their specific ad-hoc interface scheme works. Case in point - this article uses a method `pub fn implBy(impl_obj: anytype)` to connect instances to a vtable. The new zig writer uses a `.interface` data member scheme: https://www.openmymind.net/Zigs-New-Writer/ in addition to understanding when and when not to use it.
by Uehreka | 2025-07-19 23:03:13+00:00
The words “license” and “interesting” should not be in the same sentence.

Unless you are a lawyer practicing IP law, do not attempt modify or customize licenses, period. Contrary to what pbronez is saying, you have no guarantee that the terms “Terrorism + Nation-State Militaries” will function anything like you expect them to. Not to mention that most mainstream licenses have had to be crafted in special ways to deal with differences in what different countries will even allow you to put in a license (you can’t generally just write “by using this software you agree to name your child after me” and have it actually hold up).

If you don’t want your software to be used by the military industrial complex, I get it, but DO NOT just try to hand-spin a license based on what seems to make sense.

Instead, consider that you’re not the first person to want this, and there are probably like 3 existing licenses crafted by actual lawyers who know what they’re doing and can also explain the possible pitfalls in using the license.
by torginus | 2025-07-19 23:03:38+00:00
I think you misundertand me, I'm making some pie in the sky statement about AI being able to discover the laws of nature in an afternoon. I'm just making the observation that if you know the basic equiations, and enough math (which is about multivariate calc), you can derive every single formula in your Physics textbook (and most undergrads do as part of their education).

Since smart people can derive a lot of knowledge from a tiny set of axioms, smart AIs should be able to as well, which means you don't need to rely on a huge volume of curated information. Which means that needing to invest the internet and training on a terabyte of text might not be how these newer models are trained, and since they don't need to learn that much raw information, they might be smaller and faster.
by washadjeffmad | 2025-07-19 23:03:57+00:00
The 40% only applies to the portion of the estate that exceeds the tax-free threshold, which is currently £325K. If you leave your home to your children or grandchildren, that can be raised to £500K, and if you leave it to your spouse, it increases to £650K.

There are also ways to reduce the tax rate, like through charitable donations.

Like in the US with estate taxes, relatively few people are affected by it.
Show HN: I made a scan app in the skeuomorphic style of iOS 6.0
by JulienLacr0ix | 2025-07-19 23:04:38+00:00
I launched an iOS app that lets you scan documents as quickly as your camera takes photos, all wrapped in the skeuomorphic style of iOS 6.0.

It was a fun indie project. Hope some of you will enjoy it! :)
by gsf_emergency_2 | 2025-07-19 23:05:40+00:00
Our proto-edger on high had a more serious one: Corporatist.

His specific usage has the center-left covered! Too bad it didn't stick

(Strictly speaking, that'd be "neo-corp", like "neo-lib", but with more of a Futurist flavor. You could even say cyberpunk :)

https://davidgraeber.org/videos/donald-trump-is-a-classic-co...

https://youtu.be/yCQDq1oG0vA
by greatgib | 2025-07-19 23:05:41+00:00
It's a trojan horse, they try to do the same thing that is happening in the banking sector.

By this they want AI model provider to have a strong grip on their users, so controling their usage to not risk issues with the regulator. Then, the European technocrats will be able control the whole field by being able to control the top providers, that then will overreach by controlling their users.
by comrade1234 | 2025-07-19 23:05:55+00:00
Well the USA isn't following it so it's dead. But also, there were loopholes making it meaningless. For example, here in Switzerland the government said they'd follow it but local governments could provide rebates to companies.

And why not? We don't need the extra revenue. Why should we raise taxes on local companies when we don't want the money? Just because other countries can't control their spending why do we have to raise our taxes? It's stupid.
by georgeburdell | 2025-07-19 23:06:06+00:00
I’d be interested to know if anyone has a moderate cost system that doesn’t force you to use a company’s cloud (and thus making them prone to abuse like this). I personally have a POE setup with some commercial grade cameras ($400 a pop), with attached NAS on a private network, and home-rolled a means to access the cameras remotely, but it’s not exactly economical or practical
by tom_ | 2025-07-19 23:06:18+00:00
You can make the case for whatever case you are trying to make, without pushing back on this quite specific extremely correct point. When people meet. disease spreads. If it doesn't spread when they breathe on one another, it will spread when they touch. If it doesn't spread when they touch, it will spread when they fuck. If it doesn't spread when they fuck - phew, crikey, this disease is useless indeed, and natural selection will see it off quickly. Meanwhile our protagonists now have flu, norovirus and crabs.
by pyman | 2025-07-19 23:06:34+00:00
If Google accidentally generates an article claiming a politician in XYZ country is corrupt the day before an election, then quietly corrects it after the election, should we NOT hold them accountable?

Other companies have been fined for misleading customers [0] after a product launch. So why make an exception for Big Tech outside the US?

And why is the EU the only bloc actively fining US Big Tech? We need China, Asia and South America to follow their lead.

[0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_emissions_scandal
by aosaigh | 2025-07-19 23:07:14+00:00
Genuine question as I’ve been interested in the conversation around taxing wealth: how do we do it?

I assume a new government dept. has to be set up to oversee it. Or do the wealthy self assess? Are things like shares and investments valued once? Once per year? How is a company valued? How do you know if you qualify as wealthy? Do we value everyone’s wealth? Can’t the wealthy just relocate or move assets out of reach?

I don’t expect answers to this, I’m just thinking out loud as there seem to be a lot of challenges.

A few countries seem to have tried and continued to tax wealth but it seems far from proven and only seems to “work” in Switzerland, which is a bit of an outlier
by ath3nd | 2025-07-19 23:08:05+00:00
Yes, another web3, crypto and nft "inevitable" futures. Just give Sama a couple more trillion and AGI is juuuust behind the corner.

It's a fact models aren't getting as cost efficient nor better with the same rate that the costs increases of training and running them. It's also a fact that they are so unprofitable that Anthropic feels like they gotta rug-pull your Claude tokens (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44598254#44602695) without telling you, let's just ignore those facts and fanboy with wide-closed about that future.

A future framed as "inevitable" by a bunch of people whose job/wealth depends on framing it as such. Nah, hard pass.
by scoofy | 2025-07-19 23:08:06+00:00
I've read Popular Dictatorships. I'm not naive that they care about public opinion and have "elections." Having unfree and unfair elections is not the same things as having elections in a real sense. Party based FPTP elections are generally free and fair. There are real concerns about gerrymandering, but for the most part, even a gerrymandered area is effective as a political pressure release valve.

Aleksandar Matovski. Popular Dictatorships. https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/popular-dictatorships/D...
by hammyhavoc | 2025-07-19 23:08:32+00:00
You're thinking of Element: https://element.io/case-studies/nato

Now do Nextcloud and many other projects.

It's FOSS. There are volunteer contributors.

https://matrix.org/blog/2025/06/dispelling-myths/

> Matrix is not just an open standard for secure communication, it’s an openly governed and collaboratively developed ecosystem of projects powered by a growing community of volunteers and vendors. In this way, Matrix exemplifies the open source ethos, encourages greater innovation, and defies those who would try to build businesses based on extractive behavior and vendor lock-in.

Oh look, more calls for volunteers, despite "running on European taxpayer money": https://conference.matrix.org/volunteer/

Sorry, but idiotic remarks like this stink of having an agenda.

You don't even put a name and identity to your HN account and provide zero sources. At best, you're clueless, at worst you're spreading FUD.
by dijit | 2025-07-19 23:09:47+00:00
Likely you’ve been flagged because everyone on hackernews refuses to see themselves as working class and think that we’re the global elite that needs protecting.

“Failure” is of course subjective, but I would say that the gargantuan increase in wealth inequality is a datapoint in favour of suggesting that its a failed model.

Post-War consensus Britain was a golden age, and neoliberalism has been harmful to the quality of life for an overwhelming number of British people. This is just factual, by all the data we have.
by Nition | 2025-07-19 23:09:49+00:00
With the irregular layout we have now, some keys are easy (e.g. C) and some are hard (e.g. B). If you make the layout regular, putting a black note between every white note, then every key becomes the same, but also quite hard, because every major scale is now played like this: https://i.imgur.com/6EmW8eU.gif

It's not a particularly good tradeoff. If you got rid of the black keys entirely instead, you'd have to remember which keys to skip. Harder for beginners than just playing in C.

There is the Janko keyboard though: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janko_keyboard
by DoesntMatter22 | 2025-07-19 23:09:59+00:00
That's the thing I never understand about tax the rich, as soon as you do that they're going to leave. Well even before you do that they're going to leave. And a lot of these people do employ a lot of people so they just start companies elsewhere.

And even if you took let's say 95% of their wealth that wouldn't even pay down half of the US debt.

I think all this stuff ends up doing is being a brain drain to make people leave whatever country they're in for other countries
by torginus | 2025-07-19 23:10:31+00:00
I mean, generating more tokens means you use more computing power, and there's som e evidence that not all of these filler words go to waste (esp since they are not really words, but vectors that can carry latent meaning), as models tend to become smarter when allowed to generate a lot of heeming and hawing.

It's been proven that this accidental computation is actually helping CoT models, but they're not supposed to work like that - they're supposed to generate logical observations and use said observations to work further towards the goal (and they primarily do do that).

Considering filler tokens occupy context space and are less useful than meaningful tokens, a model that tries to maximize useful results per amount of compute, you'd want a terse context window without any fluff.
by monero-xmr | 2025-07-19 23:10:42+00:00
The real solution to the UK’s stagnation is accepting the truly politically difficult truth - the UK is getting poorer, year after year. The empire is long dead and gone, and their number 1 growth company and success story of the last decade is OnlyFans, a global smut purveyor.

The UK needs to radically reduce its social safety net and simultaneously cut taxes, at least for new companies and small businesses. The only way out is real, sustained, long term growth and innovation. Stealing ever more of a shrinking pie is already running out of steam.
by shivasaxena | 2025-07-19 23:12:18+00:00
Not true. This is only true for US which taxes your global income.

Most of the world taxes only income earned in that country.

> If I happen to work for a foreign corporation, I don’t get to skip paying tax.

Sure, because you earned it your country, and not in the country of domicile of foreign corporation.

EDIT: Correction, I see now that most countries do tax worldwide income, just that they have DTA so you offset taxes paid abroad.
by Herring | 2025-07-19 23:12:20+00:00
If you have to be persuaded not to do evil shit, well democrats (and independents) increasingly don’t even want you.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/692150/american-pride-slips-new...

One fine day, liberals will wake up and decide they have had enough. Whatever the cost. Conservatives will be so surprised - look how high their pride is.
by ActorNightly | 2025-07-19 23:13:08+00:00
> is more likely to be correct.

This is a moot statement. Here is a thought experiment that demonstrates the pointlessness of languages like Rust in terms of correctness.

Lets say your goal is ultimate correctness - i.e for any possible input/inital state, the program produces a known and deterministic output.

You can chose 1 of 2 languages to write your program in:

First is standard C

Second is an absolutely strict programming language, that incorporates not only memory membership Rust style, but every single object must have a well defined type that determines not only the set of values that the object can have, but the operations on that object, which produce other well defined types. Basically, the idea is that if your program compiles, its by definition correct.

The issue is, the time it takes to develop the program to be absolutely correct is about the same. In the first case with C, you would write your program with carefully designed memory allocation (something like mempool that allocates at the start), you would design unit tests, you would run valgrind, and so on.

In the second case, you would spend a lot more time carefully designing types and operations, leading to a lot of churn of code-compile-fix error-repeat, taking you way longer to develop the program.

You could argue that the programmer is somewhat incompetent (for example, forgets to run valgrind), so the second language will have a higher change of being absolutely correct. However the argument still holds - in the second language, a slightly incompetent programmer can be lazy and define wide ranging types (similar to `any` in languages like typescript), leading to technical correctness, but logic bugs.

So in the end, it really doesn't matter which language you chose if you want ultimate correctness, because its all up to the programmer. However, if your goal is rapid prototyping, and you can guarantee that your input is constrained to a certain range, and even though out of range program will lead to a memory bug or failure of some sort, programming in something like C is going to be more efficient, whereas the second language will force you write a lot more code for basic things.
by yial | 2025-07-19 23:13:11+00:00
That makes complete sense. If you’ve tried epee, moving to foil I believe would be hard and not as enjoyable. I know I myself while continuing to fence with foil for years, much preferred epee. Even when teaching, as soon as class was over and I had free time I would put down the foil and switch to epee. One thing I will say is that foil is more enjoyable in my opinion without electronic scoring. Either for fun acknowledging when you’ve been hit, or, with a four judge system.

Japanese sword styles have always been fascinating to me, though I lack any formal education in them.
by estebank | 2025-07-19 23:14:14+00:00
Making partial borrows to be expressable in method definitions would allow the design pattern to be expressed without breaking the current lifetime evaluation boundary.

Allowing the borrow checker to peek inside of the body of local methods for the purposes of identifying partial borrows would fundamentally break the locality of the borrow checker, but I think that as long as that analysis is only extended to methods on the local trait impl, it could be done without too much fanfare. These two things would be relaxations of the borrow checker rules, making it smarter, if you will.
by andrepd | 2025-07-19 23:14:44+00:00
It's not a revolutionary idea. That I know of, the Netherlands does it, somewhat. How it works is: rather than taxing capital gains, with its myriad loopholes and counterloopholes, you tax assets directly: assume a neutral sort of "risk-free" rate of return, and then tax a percentage of that. E.g. assume yearly return of 1% on cash and savings, 6% on other assets, etc, then levy tax of 30% on that (past a tax-free allowance of 25k€ per person).

Simple, and more effective!
by kaliszad | 2025-07-19 23:14:58+00:00
The author is a great guy and indeed quite smart and meticulous in areas he cares about deeply. He is a published author with a reasonably popular book considering the market size: https://www.melvil.cz/kniha-jak-sbalit-zenu-20/ he has edited probably more books than he would like to admit as well. It's not surprising he is able to write a good article.

However good writing is a skill you can get good at with enough practice. Read a lot, write a lot of garbage, consult more experienced writers and eventually you will write readable articles soon. Do 10-100x more of that and you will be pretty great. The rest is some kind skill and experience in many other fields than writing which will inform how to write even better. Some of it is intelligence, luck, great mentors and perhaps something we call talent even. As with most things you can get far just by working diligently a lot.
by mattmanser | 2025-07-19 23:15:04+00:00
There's been a big shift of rich people avoiding taking pay or dividends. Instead they get paid in stock, and then get interest free loans secured on that stock to actually spend money.

It's a loophole the mega-rich are using to avoid tax.

The other thing that's happened is that a lot of the mega-rich have lobbied to gradually chip away at inheritance taxes. So again they just pass the asset, paying a fraction of the taxes they'd have paid had they been a "normal" tax payer.

And one of the big things they've got? No capital gains on those stocks when passed to children.

So yeah, we need to tax assets as well as income. Because anything that's not taxed the rich just funnel money into it to avoid paying tax.
by MaulingMonkey | 2025-07-19 23:15:11+00:00
As a Rust fan, I 100% agree. I already know plenty of nice, "safe", "efficient" languages. I know only one language with a borrow checker, and that feature has honestly driven me to use it in excess.

Most of my smaller projects don't benefit so much from the statically proven compile time guarantees that e.g. Rust with it's borrow checker provide. They're simple enough to more-or-less exhaustively test. They also tend to have simple enough data models and/or lax enough latency requirements that garbage collectors aren't a drawback. C#? Kotlin? Java? Javascript? ??? Doesn't matter. I'm writing them in Rust now, and I'm comfortable enough with the borrow checker that I don't feel it slows me down, but I wouldn't have learned Rust in the first place without a borrow checker to draw me in, and I respect when people choose to pass on the whole circus for similar projects.

The larger projects... for me they tend to be C++, and haven't been rewritten in Rust, so I'm tormented with a stream of bugs, a large portion of which would've been prevented - or at least made shallow - by Rust's borrow checker. Every single one of them taunts me with how theoretically preventable they are.
by rapfaria | 2025-07-19 23:15:48+00:00
I'd go even a step further: For the big corp, having a point of failure that lives outside its structure can be a feature, and not a bug.

"Oh there goes Super Entrepise DB Partner again" turns into a product next fiscal year, that shutdowns the following year because the scope was too big, but at least they tried to make things better.