MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by asadotzler | 2025-07-18 22:42:50+00:00
You said it was pretty standard for bug bounty programs, and I disagreed pointing to several of the largest and longest lived bug bounty programs, none of which do that, and your response is pointing out that one particular platform does it?

Even among 3rd party platforms, of which there are several bigs, the NDAs are not a platform requirement, just an option for participating firms.

NDAs are not the norm. Don't mislead people who would otherwise get into this game with non-issues they need not worry over.
by tetromino_ | 2025-07-18 22:43:56+00:00
> it is ultimately the Evolution developer's responsibility to not ship an end product with known security issues

Is it? One could argue that Evolution developers do not ship an end product, and that it's distros - Debian, Fedora, etc. - who ship the end product by combining Evolution at version X with Webkit at version Y, and possibly patching both.
by milchek | 2025-07-18 22:44:02+00:00
I suppose different trials do it in various ways, for hers there was a placebo group that was given a strong antihistamine. Participants in the trial were allowed to opt in for the real dosing day once the trial concluded. I suppose this was to entice people to join, as otherwise it was basically 50/50 if you would get the trial treatment you were looking for. Post trial dosing was obviously omitted from the results.
by giantg2 | 2025-07-18 22:44:32+00:00
Medicaid reimbursement rates tend to be lower than the cost to treat in many instances. Only preserving Medicaid funding will not prevent hospital closures. We already know that with or without Medicaid, rural hospitals continue to close. The only difference is the speed at which they do.

The question was about some universal system preventing rural deaths. If the coverage difference is only 1-2%, then coverage doesn't seem to be the driver. If it's a provider and facility shortage, then we would need some strategy to address the provider shortage, even if we assume we can fix the facility issue by providing higher reimbursement rates or grants.
by dvt | 2025-07-18 22:44:38+00:00
"Asynchrony" is a very bad word for this and we already have a very well-defined mathematical one: commutativity. Some operations are commutative (order does not matter: addition, multiplication, etc.), while others are non-commutative (order does matter: subtraction, division, etc.).

try io.asyncConcurrent(Server.accept, .{server, io}); io.async(Cient.connect, .{client, io});

Usually, ordering of operations in code is indicated by the line number (first line happens before the second line, and so on), but I understand that this might fly out the window in async code. So, my gut tells me this would be better achieved with the (shudder) `.then(...)` paradigm. It sucks, but better the devil you know than the devil you don't.

As written, `asyncConcurrent(...)` is confusing as shit, and unless you memorize this blog post, you'll have no idea what this code means. I get that Zig (like Rust, which I really like fwiw) is trying all kinds of new hipster things, but half the time they just end up being unintuitive and confusing. Either implement (async-based) commutativity/operation ordering somehow (like Rust's lifetimes maybe?) or just use what people are already used to.
by kristoff_it | 2025-07-18 22:45:00+00:00
> If the client were to execute before the server and fail to connect (the server is not running to accept the connection) then your system has failed, the server will run later and be waiting forever on a client who's already died.

From the article:

> Like before, the order doesn’t matter: the client could begin a connection before the server starts accepting (the OS will buffer the client request in the meantime), or the server could start accepting first and wait for a bit before seeing an incoming connection.

When you create a server socket, you need to call `listen` and after that clients can begin connecting. You don't need to have already called `accept`, as explained in the article.
by skissane | 2025-07-18 22:45:05+00:00
> Writing a BIOS for a new machine in a single afternoon. Those were the days...

This was not a BIOS in the sense of the PC ROM-BIOS, it was an OS module containing device drivers - the equivalent in PC-DOS is IBMIO.COM, in MS-DOS it is IO.SYS.

Of course, writing it in an afternoon was still impressive, but it was a lot smaller than even the IBM PC ROM-BIOS; the MVP was essentially just two device drivers, one for the floppy drive, the other for either the screen/keyboard or for the serial port (if you used an attached serial terminal for IO). Probably IMSAI already had code for those drivers and they were just taking that existing code and interfacing it with the CP/M BIOS API
by csa | 2025-07-18 22:45:20+00:00
> I’ve seen people driven to tears in this environment right now from stress due to overwork. Everyone in my org was either burnt out or soon to be. And that overwork is from managers demanding more and more without any data to back up exactly how much more is reasonable.

This is just bad management. AI might be the buzzword of the day that comes out of their mouths, but the issue is bad management rather than AI.

Said another way, if it wasn’t AI, it would be something else.

Are all of the items in the long list of something elses in the past and in the future the actual villain here? I don’t think so.

> Then you get these types on HN calling people luddites for having strong opinions and anxieties as if it’s only ever about the technology itself and not the effect it has on actual people

Why are you blaming the tech rather than the source of the problem? Point your finger at the people who are creating the problems — hint, it’s the management and not tools.

AI is just a tool. Just like any tool, it can be used for good or for bad. It can be used skillfully or unskillfully.

Right now, we are certainly in a high variance stage of quality of implementation.

That said, I think AI will do a good job of shining a bright light on the pretenders… it will be much tougher for them to hide.

> in a cutthroat capitalist system.

Unchecked capitalism certainly can take some of the blame here. The problem is that the only system that is better than the current system is almost certainly some other form of capitalism (maybe with some humanity checks and balances).

> That’s exactly the sort of thing that brought the term “tech bro” into the limelight.

Thank you for this. I’m pretty sure that this is the first time I’ve been called a “tech bro” — certainly the first time directly. My friends and family will get a kick out of this, since I have routinely outed tech bros who are more style than substance.

I’m fairly certain that I don’t fall into that category.
by throwawayQuwcy | 2025-07-18 22:46:09+00:00
Thanks for the info on Gerald Shea! Though if you'd like to comment on the "Shea Memorandum" / Gerald Shea I think that would be more appropriate on the parent comment?

A question was asked, I answered with the relevant quote from the paper, you replied "conspiracy theory" on that specific quote & ad-hominem'ed the author?

Calling "conspiracy theory" is not good-faith discussion and employs a number of logical fallacies like appeal to ridicule & poisoning the well.

What parts of the "Shea Memorandum" do you think are likely non-factual? The Israeli art students?
by Spooky23 | 2025-07-18 22:46:47+00:00
You might be able to target and preemptively treat some aggressive cancers!

I lost my wife to melanoma that metastasized to her brain after cancerous mole and margin was removed 4 years earlier. They did due diligence and by all signs there was no evidence of recurrence, until there was. They think that the tumor appeared 2-3 months before symptoms (headaches) appeared, so it was unlikely that you’d discover it otherwise.

With something like this, maybe you could get lower dose immunotherapy that would help your body eradicate the cancer?
by Duanemclemore | 2025-07-18 22:47:28+00:00
Well I've been a big fan of 100r since I heard of them through the Future of Coding [0][1](and esoteric.codes [2]).

BUT JUST NOW I'm kicking around the website again today and find out that Devine made the game Hiversaires way back in the day [3] which is a banger. So I guess I've been a fan for like 12 years. I'm very tempted to buy it again.

100r are also an inspiration that a different way of life and relationship with creativity and society are possible... so if I ever drop out definitely don't look for me doing permacomputing on a sailboat in coastal BC. Don't look for me - because I won't want to be found, ok thanks in advance?

[0] https://futureofcoding.org/episodes/044

[1] https://futureofcoding.org/episodes/045

[2] https://esoteric.codes/blog/100-rabbits

[3] https://100r.co/site/hiversaires.html
by overgard | 2025-07-18 22:47:57+00:00
I'm not sure exactly what you mean by deflationary, but in general deflation in an economy is a very bad thing. The most significant period of economic deflation in the US was 1930-1933, ie, the great depression, and the most recent period was the great recession.

And since when do business executives NOT pocket the money? Pretty much the only exception is when they reinvest the savings into the business, for more growth, but that reinvestment and growth usually is only something the rest of us care about if it involves hiring..
by t0mas88 | 2025-07-18 22:48:43+00:00
Sounds like a reasonable guideline to me. Even for open source models, you can add a license term that requires users of the open source model to take "appropriate measures to avoid the repeated generation of output that is identical or recognisably similar to protected works"

This is European law, not US. Reasonable means reasonable and judges here are expected to weigh each side's interests and come to a conclusion. Not just a literal interpretation of the law.
by nathanielsimard | 2025-07-18 22:48:48+00:00
Well we can agree to disagree, CubeCL also has the concept of instruction parallelism, which would be used to target simd instructions on CPU. Our algorithms are normally flexible on both the plane size and the line size, adapting to the hardware with comptime logique. You are free to dislike the naming, but imo a mix of multiple APIs is worse than something new.
by podgietaru | 2025-07-18 22:49:20+00:00
“ With this fund, we will work with partners to scale impact and foster innovation by leveraging AI’s transformative potential in areas such as education, economic opportunity, community organizing, and healthcare. We will also support community-led research and innovation for using AI’s potential to advance the public good.”

We will subsidise the use of our technology in schools, to get people dependant. This will be our future revenue. We need to make it sound flowery though. ChatGPT. Make me sound like a philanthropist.
by uzuituo | 2025-07-18 22:49:42+00:00
I use Libreoffice at work to open and edit MS Office files and it works mostly fine, except for PowerPoint (missing fonts but also general madness). In general, I think the LibreOffice folks did a great job, esp. when it comes to MS file format support. And of course they need to, because I (and I guess most people) actually open more Ms files with LibreOffice than files in LOs native formats.
by bilekas | 2025-07-18 22:49:49+00:00
> It aims to improve transparency and safety surrounding the technology

Really it does, especially with some technology run by so few which is changing things so fast..

> Meta says it won’t sign Europe AI agreement, calling it an overreach that will stunt growth

God forbid critical things and impactful tech like this be created with a measured head, instead of this nonsense mantra of "Move fast and break things"

Id really prefer NOT to break at least what semblance of society social media hasn't already broken.
by WCSTombs | 2025-07-18 22:50:07+00:00
As a one-time mathematician, this was a really fascinating article. The similarities seem to be entirely coincidental, but what would have been my doctoral dissertation was also about generalizing some concepts from smooth manifolds to a "non-smooth" setting, and the crux of my work also hinged on optimal transport.

Actually I feel optimal transport is a pretty underrated concept in both pure and applied math, and I would have loved to explore it had I continued in academia. But oh well, one must make choices in life...
by throw310822 | 2025-07-18 22:51:20+00:00
Nobody is obsessed with it. People are afraid of it. And yet, what will you do? Will you renounce adopting a tool that can make your work or someone else's work faster, easier, better? It's a trap: once you've seen the possibilities you can't go back; and if you do, you'll have to compete with those who keep using the new tools. Even if you know perfectly well that in a few years the tools will make your own job useless.

Personally, however, I would find it possibly even more depressing to spend my day doing a job that has economic value only because some regulation prevents it being done more efficiently. At that point I'd rather get the money anyway and spend the day at the beach.
by puchatek | 2025-07-18 22:51:27+00:00
It's unlikely that LLMs are gonna get us there though. They ingested all relevant data at this point at the net effect might very well kill future sources of quality data. How is e.g. stackoverflow gonna stay alive if the next generation of programmers relies mainly on copilot and vibe coding? And what will the LLMs scrape once it's gone?
by NewJazz | 2025-07-18 22:51:29+00:00
Consuming one that is well written isn't too much pain, IME. But writing or modifying one can be really annoying. Aiui the values.yaml has no type schema, just vibes. The whole thing is powered off using text templating with yaml (a whitespace sensitive language), which is error prone and often hard to read. That's basically the main issues in a nutshell, it may not sound like much, but helm doesn't exactly do a whole lot and it does that limited set of stuff poorly.
by skybrian | 2025-07-18 22:51:41+00:00
The way I like to think about it is that libraries vary in which environments they support. Writing portable libraries that work in any environment is nice, but often unnecessary. Sometimes you don't care if your code works on Windows, or whether it works without green threads, or (in Rust) whether it works without the standard library.

So I think it's nice when type systems let you declare the environments a function supports. This would catch mistakes where you call a less-portable function in a portable library; you'd get a compile error, indicating that you need to detect that situation and call the function conditionally, with a fallback.
by 1vuio0pswjnm7 | 2025-07-18 22:52:05+00:00
In more recent times, NetBSD has added OpenBSD's version of nc to the base system.

One could thus argue that there is a TCP client "installed on every system".

For me, what is more important is an installed copy of GCC. I have yet to use a UNIX-like system that did not have the needed networking functions to create a basic TCP client.
by mvieira38 | 2025-07-18 22:52:06+00:00
Your examples are not LLMs, though, and don't really behave like them at all. If we take the chess analogy and design an "LLM-like chess engine", it would behave like an average 1400 London spammer, not like Stockfish, because it would try to play like the average human plays in it's database.

It isn't entirely clear what problem LLMs are solving and what they are optimizing towards... They sound humanlike and give some good solutions to stuff, but there are so many glaring holes. How are we so many years and billions of dollars in and I can't reliably play a coherent game of chess with ChatGPT, let alone have it be useful?
by chiwilliams | 2025-07-18 22:52:12+00:00
He did use a little autocomplete apparently, but used [Vscode](https://x.com/jacob_posel/status/1945585787690738051).

And it's not against the rules to use LLMs apparently in the competition. (https://atcoder.jp/posts/1495). I'd be curious what other competitors used.
by t0mas88 | 2025-07-18 22:53:38+00:00
Sure, but Meta saying "We share concerns raised by these businesses" translates to: It is in our and only our benefit for PR reasons to agree with someone, we don't care who they are, we don't give a fuck, but just this second it sounds great to use them for our lobbying.

Meta has never done and will never do anything in the general public's interest. All they care about is harvesting more data to sell more ads.
by justlikereddit | 2025-07-18 22:54:17+00:00
The more I read of the existing rule sets within the eurozone the less surprised I am that they make additional shit tier acts like this.

What do surprise me is anything at all working with the existing rulesets, Effectively no one have technical competence and the main purpose of legislation seems to add mostly meaningless but parentally formulated complexities in order to justify hiring more bureaucrats.

>How to live in Europe >1. Have a job that does not need state approval or licensing. >2. Ignore all laws, they are too verbose and too technically complex to enforce properly anyway.
by pembrook | 2025-07-18 22:54:36+00:00
Hard disagree on both GDPR and USBC.

If I had to pick a connector that the world was forced to use forever due to some European technocrat, I would not have picked usb-c.

Hell, the ports on my MacBook are nearly shot just a few years in.

Plus GDPR has created more value for lawyers and consultants than it has for EU citizens.
by crackrook | 2025-07-18 22:54:45+00:00
I don't fundamentally disagree but I feel there's a selection bias at work here. I'm not an economist, but: maybe the things that could have a market bolstering effect are - by nature - harder to identify because they represent growth opportunities that haven't been captured yet? The sector-reinvigorating innovations over the horizon wouldn't be innovations if they were easy to anticipate.
by tuesdaynight | 2025-07-18 22:55:08+00:00
I just don't buy it, sorry. One thing that I learned about the internet is that most online opinions are from extremes: excellent or horrible experiences. Just search about any surgery. You will probably find a lot of bad experiences for anything. However, if you look at the data for the big picture, psilocybin is one of the safest drugs out there. There are risks, but they are nowhere near what you see in these conversations.
by kazinator | 2025-07-18 22:55:16+00:00
I mean that it's possible in the sense of being designed in as a guarantee; that the async operations issued against some API object will be performed in the order in which they are submitted, like a FIFO queue.

I don't mean "promise.then", whereby the issuance of the next request is gated on the completion of the first.

An example might be async writes to a file. If we write "abc" at the start of the file in one request and "123" starting at the second byte in the second requests, there can be a guarantee that the result will be "a123", and not "abc2", without gating on the first request completing before starting the other.

async doesn't mean out of order; it means the request initiator doesn't synchronize on the completion as a single operation.
by egonschiele | 2025-07-18 22:55:43+00:00
This is awesome. Exactly the sort of thing I like to see on HN: someone going deep on a niche they really care about. The app is more polished than I expected.

The design is nice and clean. I really appreciate dark mode as well, though some of the text on this page, for example https://app.librari.io/subscription looks like it needs to be tweaked for dark mode.

I would genuinely use this, as I don't always like the public aspect of Goodreads, but it would depend on your pricing structure and privacy policy.

Feature request: bulk import of books.
by asadotzler | 2025-07-18 22:56:18+00:00
I'm gonna follow your lead on goal post moving for my response.

I'm sure no user data is shared with Brave's search partners (and don't pretend they don't get paid by Google and others for all the users who abandon the not-great Brave Search for a more capable service.) Google just pays them whatever they pinky swear to Google was their traffic, no reporting at all, no search telemetry, none of that. Right?

And I'm sure zero user data makes it to big advertisers who pay for full new tab takeovers. I mean, why wouldn't big advertisers throw tens of thousands of dollars a day on ads with no proof of reach or return.

Oh, it's anonymized, you say? So, just like all the other browsers?

Also, a quarter of a billion VC dollars have to be paid back at some point. You can't claim anything is truly sustainable when VCs still own a quarter of its value and it's taken VC money 7 of the last 10 years.
by ars | 2025-07-18 22:56:58+00:00
The big companies really don't seem to care about low bandwidth users.

I attempted to use Teams website once over a very low speed hotspot. It utterly failed. It just kept reloading the same resource over and over and over, maybe it didn't wait long enough? Not sure. But it never worked.

I then tried the teams app, and that was no better. It would get stuck on the main screen and couldn't go any further.

So then I tried outlook, desktop client. Total fail there as well, it couldn't seem to manage to download a couple emails.

I finally resorted to ssh and using a command line.

I feel like a old man screaming get off my lawn, but it really seems like the new programmers need to use old computers for a while and learn how to be more efficient.
by twelve40 | 2025-07-18 22:57:03+00:00
why is this so surprising? every place i worked at, going back probably 6 jobs, was using an ORM (django, hibernate, or even a self-built one), they went on to get acquired by Twitter, Microsoft, Uber etc, so not completely stupid or obscure. Even if you have a personal dislike of ORMs, if you ever work with/for another team with an exiting codebase and a DB, chances are you will have to work with one.
by marginalia_nu | 2025-07-18 22:57:13+00:00
A good example of how this can end up with negative outcomes is the cookie directive, which is how we ended up with cookie consent popovers on every website that does absolutely nothing to prevent tracking and has only amounted to making lives more frustrating in the EU and abroad.

It was a decade too late and written by people who were incredibly out of touch with the actual problem. The GDPR is a bit better, but it's still a far bigger nuisance for regular European citizens than the companies that still largely unhindered track and profile the same.
by thedanbob | 2025-07-18 22:57:14+00:00
> But, maybe it would be best not to have “yay” available. Using something like AUR without reading the package build files is… pretty bad, right? And it is bad for the community, because if there is a convention of doing that sort of thing, it makes the AUR a good target for attacking.

I don't remember how yay works but paru (another AUR package manager) displays the pkgbuild file before it will install.
by shikon7 | 2025-07-18 22:57:41+00:00
The novel concept is to make it explicit where a non-concurrent scheduler is enough (async), and where it is not (async-concurrent). As a benefit, you can call async functions directly from a synchronous context, which is not possible for the usual async/await, therefore avoiding the need to have both sync and async versions of every function.

And with green threads, you can have a call chain from async to sync to async, and still allow the inner async function to yield through to the outer async function. This keeps the benefit of async system calls, even if the wrapping library only uses synchronous functions.
by Lerc | 2025-07-18 22:58:22+00:00
Has there been much research into slightly flawed matrix multiplications?

If you have a measure of correctness, and a measure of performance. Is there a maximum value of correctness per some unit of processing that exists below a full matrix multiply

Obviously it can be done with precision, since that is what floating point is. But is there anything where you can save x% of computation and have fewer than x% incorrect values in a matrix multiplications?

Gradient descent wouldn't really care about a few (Reliably) dud values.