MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by pengaru | 2025-07-26 21:13:59+00:00
When I was a kid in the 80s my mother worked at a jewelry store and CZ diamonds were already considered cheap fakes at the time. The price was not comparable to the real deal because nobody was buying them at diamond prices.

They were simply dismissed as more trash belonging in the gold-plated case. It's hard to appreciate how much less informed people were back then - we're talking pre-internet. The adults around me couldn't explain scientifically what the actual difference was between a CZ and natural diamond. Just one was a fake, held little value, and was a sure way to lose your fiance.
by creer | 2025-07-26 21:14:22+00:00
> If your new system interacts with the old system at all there is an attack point.

Yes but no. Currently the issue is that these two payment systems - both credit/debit card networks - (1) have the power to decide with impunity, because they have critical mass. And (2) have visibility into who each vendor is and what they are selling. If there is one case of abusing market dominance, this is it - and for all we frequently hear, this is REALLY not all that common. (And it's "funny" that we hear a lot about Apple's app store - but not about their anti-adult content rules!)

For example, right now a bank would have a VERY hard time preventing you from paying for $OBJECTIONABLE_CONTENT with crypto. That bank would have no visibility into who you are paying with that crypto. There are other crypto intermediaries but they are "diffuse". Nobody in there has both visibility and power.

For example, right now some vendors accept gift cards as payment. Buy a Home Depot gift card in cash at your local store and use it to pay for $OBJECTIONABLE_CONTENT. Obviously this is not a very efficient payment infrastructure but it exists.

But yes of course, imposing to credit card networks to be content-blind would be helpful and soooo much more efficient.
by timhh | 2025-07-26 21:14:32+00:00
It's still kind of experimental. Also the purpose is more for formal verification against a real design. The RISC-V model doesn't have any microarchitectural features you'd need for a real chip - not even pipelining - so it would be very slow.

Still... it is tantalisingly close to a really nice HDL for design purposes. I have considered trying to make a pipelined RISC-V chip in Sail with all the caches, branch predictor etc.

One feature that makes it a little awkward though is that there isn't really anything like a class or a SV module that you can reuse. If you want to have N of anything you pretty much have to copy & paste it N times.
by gooseus | 2025-07-26 21:16:53+00:00
https://ia801604.us.archive.org/27/items/everything-is-bulls...

> We exchange diamond rings as part of the engagement process because the diamond company De Beers decided in 1938 that it would like us to. Prior to a stunningly successful marketing campaign, Americans occasionally exchanged engagement rings, but it wasn’t pervasive. Not only is the demand for diamonds a marketing invention, but diamonds aren’t actually that rare. Only by carefully restricting the supply has De Beers kept the price of a diamond high.

Imho, that "soul" you describe is an artifact of human sentimentality and a very successful marketing campaign by a bunch of Afrikaner colonialists.
by belorn | 2025-07-26 21:17:05+00:00
The technical term of "any form of violence" seems to be Partner Abuse, and the definition is: "violence refers to behaviour within an intimate relationship that causes physical, sexual or psychological harm, including acts of physical aggression, sexual coercion, psychological abuse and controlling behaviours."

The primary motives are to get back at a partner for emotionally hurting them, because of stress or jealousy, to express anger and other feelings that they could not put into words or communicate, and to get their partner’s attention.

The highest rates are found in high school and college, and the majority of partner violence is bidirectional. (A meta study illustrating this: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/15248380231193440)

The idea that women are unable of violent behavior, or immune to wanting to take revenge for being emotional hurt or stressed, seems utterly unlikely. Especially young adults who might lack the tools and experience to avoid falling into violent responses.

To quote a different finding: Eight studies directly compared men and women in the power/control motive and subjected their findings to statistical analyses. Three reported no significant gender differences and one had mixed findings. One paper found that women were more motivated to perpetrate violence as a result of power/control than were men, and three found that men were more motivated; however, gender differences were weak

Asking if "men risk as much as women" is a very different question however. If a woman throws a knife at a man, and a man hits a woman in the face, who carry the highest risk? Statically, the fist is going to do significant more damage on average than the knife, as throwing a knife (especially a non-throwing knife), hitting the target, and creating damage is fairly unlikely for a non-proficient attacker. If the attacks was recorded on camera/witnessed, one would be an attack with a deadly weapon with the intent to kill, and the other would be physical assault.

The point is that partner violence is a complex problem, which only simple aspect being that both women and men are humans.
by rollcat | 2025-07-26 21:18:24+00:00
> I'd say it's like AI music or art - something made by a machine, for some reason, just doesn't have any "soul" to it.

Diamonds are a product of natural geological processes. (Or, are grown in a lab, by recreating similar conditions.)

Music and art are products of human talent, skill, and labor - that ML companies have used (without a license, permission, or even credit) to build datasets that are now being used to make money, at the expense of these artists.

These are not the same things.
by zahlman | 2025-07-26 21:18:33+00:00
> The five chapters of SICP (I recommend http://sarabander.github.io/sicp/html/index.xhtml) are:

> - 1 Building Abstractions with Procedures

Where Abelson, Sussman & Sussman use the word "procedures" here, they mean what we would typically call "functions" today. Today, "procedural programming" basically means "imperative programming", and that is not the idiom they are teaching. (Where the exact term "procedure" is used nowadays — though it's less common now — it generally refers specifically to a function which does not return a usable value, which is called specifically for its side effects. SICP instead generally describes what we would now call "functional programming".)

> That is, you were explicitly asserting that the core material of SICP was concerned with "structure", "architecture", and "functions" in the sense of the core material of those courses

By "SICP" I clearly meant 6.001 and only 6.001, since that's the course titled as such ("SICP" stands for "Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs").

I was not asserting that SICP was concerned with any term in the sense of the core material of any other course, which is why I didn't mention the other courses in that sentence. I was asserting that SICP was concerned with those concepts as they are commonly understood.

I wrote the comment knowing nothing of the content of the other courses, because nothing about the content of the other courses was relevant to the point I was making.

Please do not try to tell me what I meant by my own words.
by Aurornis | 2025-07-26 21:18:56+00:00
These reports are always so hard to interpret. There is a very strong incentive for involved parties to come up with alternate explanations when accidents occur in all accidents, not just gun accidents. In certain types of vehicle accidents it’s common for people to claim the vehicle accelerated by itself or that they were pressing the brake when they were actually pressing the accelerator.

The claimed incident with security footage would be interesting to see, or at least read a detailed report about. I’m curious how they confirmed the safety was on from security camera footage.

Unless I’m missing something, it looks like people who have tried to replicate the problem with repeated tests so far cannot do it. This seems like a goldmine for YouTubers looking to get headlines if they can make it happen.
by spwa4 | 2025-07-26 21:20:06+00:00
Only through chemical means which triggers relatively far away neurons to produce pain. This has the consequence that the pain is not felt at it's source.

E.g. a doctor will become very nervous if you report dizziness with a pain moving from your chest into your left shoulder or neck. Such pain originates along the path of the vagus nerve, which includes your lungs and heart (and half the digestive organs, and even the womb, kidneys and gall bladder sometimes). It's very tricky to diagnose, and usually extremely serious (as in ignoring it may cause death).
by jemmyw | 2025-07-26 21:20:26+00:00
Well I read the article and, having known nothing about the subject at all, found it somewhat informative. Having a few words of silly sprinkled throughout for amusement was fine.

I don't read The Register often, it seems to concentrate more on IT industry news. But when they have run stories of interest they do seem to follow them up, so you get a reasonably researched picture over time and a couple of opinion pieces.
by alberth | 2025-07-26 21:20:47+00:00
> Had Yahoo increased its offer by just $100 million, Facebook’s board would have forced Zuckerberg to take it.

Is that true?

Zuck still controls 57% of all voting shares and that’s today, yearly 20-years later.

How could the Board force him to sell to Yahoo.

https://www.reuters.com/breakingviews/zuckerberg-motivates-s...
by astrange | 2025-07-26 21:22:04+00:00
It doesn't have to be perfect. This is how financial regulation works in the US too, but it does work. The idea is that every individual step is weak, but it's a crime to bypass any of it. So the deterrence is you can catch things probabilistically and most people don't want to commit a whole bunch of crimes at once because they all have individual punishments.
by 0x6c6f6c | 2025-07-26 21:23:11+00:00
The author also says they want to be able to understand all of the components of the system. Software that needs upgrades that may not be backwards compatible is an issue. I imagine many web servers can fall under either of these concerns, including Apache and Nginx.

I'm not a fan of Go myself, but I can see how a simple Go HTTP server fits the bill.
by ghaff | 2025-07-26 21:23:52+00:00
I came to that conclusion years ago. I guess that for a family or group of friends, a ski condo could maybe make sense--or for literal snowbirds that migrated with the season.

But the conclusion I came to years ago was that who wanted to be tied down to a particular location or urban location for vacation. Yeah, it's not cheap but more-so than owning and having to deal with a second home.
by tucnak | 2025-07-26 21:24:54+00:00
What you allude to is not so much "fact," as the "heart" of the matter. The availability of AI tooling takes away nothing; you elect to either use it, or not. I personally hate having to deal with human editors! Most of them typically fit in two broad categories: guns-for-hire and genuine collaborators. The "fact" of the matter is such that AI does not prevent me from collaborating with any of my peers, however, it does allow me to pseudo-collaborate with the writers long-dead! In fact, I happen to maintaib a collection of theatrical play-journals, riddled with conversations I've had at the time with various historical figures vis-à-vis AI. This is the single most valuable source of inspiration enabling my writing in ways that my peers never could. AI-assisted writing is a misnomer—it's not about writing as much as reading, and moreso playing, which is how we get creative.

Wittgenstein would absolutely love it!

It doesn't surprise me that those of us to have failed in keeping up with the constantly-evolving AI tooling, would also make it part of their newly-refined, all-human identity. IMHO, similarly to how hating popular things does not make you cool, not using AI does not make you a joyous independent creator to bravely hold post in the treacherous world of AI slop! It sounds more like a fantasy than coherent creative position. We're still in the early days when it comes to creative writing comprehension in AI. You may or may not be surprised that there's very little to show for in terms of evals when it comes to that. Unlike coding and maths, fiction is yet to be recognised as verifiable domain. (Probably due to probability distribution in fictional outputs not necessarily converging the way of related objective rewards!) However, some labs are working it! There's a huge market for creative writing aids, as it'a necessary to everything from education (as story-telling is what makes studying worthwhile) to political work.
by tucnak | 2025-07-26 21:24:59+00:00
I take it you're the maintainer. Firstly, congrats on the work done, for the open source people are a small crowd, and determination of Rust teams here is commendable. On the other hand, I'm struggling to see the unique value proposition. What is your motivation with Rust-GPU? Graphics or general-purpose computing? If it's the latter, at least from my POV, I would struggle to justify going up against a daunting umbrella project like this; in view of it likely culminating in layers upon layers of abstraction. Is the long-term goal here to have fun writing a bit of Rust, or upsetting the entrenched status quo of highly-concurrent GPU programming? There's a saying that goes along like "pleasing all is a lot like pleasing none," and intuitively I would guess it should apply here.
by thephyber | 2025-07-26 21:26:37+00:00
This seems like an extremely biased opinion.

PWAs are only as good of a user experience as the developer programs it to be. The average local TV news affiliate website spends 5MB-20MB of bandwidth within a minute of downloading 1 page. My last iOS app was only 5MB shipped and only consumes a few KB of bandwidth per session.

There are massive convenience features that native apps support which aren’t available to browser APIs. Auth, payments, notifications, parental controls, power efficiency, and perhaps security and privacy (depending on how prevalent analytics/ tracking/ advertising libraries are on native apps).

A well crafted PWA can compete on most features with a well crafted app, but ultimately the App Store review process means native apps have a decently high floor, whereas PWAs have zero floor.
The easiest dark mode for beginners
by amrkilany | 2025-07-26 21:26:51+00:00
hi devs i made a small opensource project for beginners who want to make fast,easy dark mode in their website with local storage without external frameworks it's here: <script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/gh/AMR2010M/butterfly-css@main/dark.js"></script>

attributes: dark-btn => for the toogle dark mode switch d+color =>when dark set the bg-color to this color l+color =>light mode bg-color dt+color text in dark mode tl+color text in light mode

supported colors: white,purple,blue,green,orange,black,yellow pls give me your feedback

this dark mode will be in v2 of my framework butterfly css
by radpanda | 2025-07-26 21:27:02+00:00
> I bet it if the math was done based on vacation land area, Hawaii would come up near the top, given Lanai

I’d be shocked if the parcels that Larry Ellison owns on Lanai are classified in a way that would show up as a vacation home. Typically rich large landowners in Hawaii are “gentleman farmers” who (ab)use agricultural tax loopholes.

https://jacobin.com/2023/06/agriculture-property-tax-break-u...
by spwa4 | 2025-07-26 21:28:22+00:00
> Secondly, why bother: because the current world system is destroying nature

Is it? If you put it this dramatically, it's bullshit. Nature will survive us, rather than the other way around, guaranteed. MAYBE we can kill large animals if we tried, but probably not even that (they'd just shrink and then grow large again, wouldn't be the first, or second, or even the tenth time that happened).

Life on earth is being sustained by the sun and by nuclear reactions inside the earth. Nothing we do makes the tiniest of difference in the long run.

Increased temperature and increased CO2 and climate change essentially make more chemical and solar energy available in the environment. Life is chemical in nature and is limited by available energy. That means there would be more life, more green, if more energy was available. Life would have to be pretty damn badly designed if this damaged it, rather than what we actually see happening: life is spreading to much more of the planet than even 100 years ago.

So, first, you can rest assured: it is just people messing up their own little world.

Second: it would be seriously unnatural if we stopped. After all competing and using up all available resources is literally the sole goal of all life on earth. And if you compare humans to an average ocean-bound bacterial species, we're not even particularly good at it.
by zahlman | 2025-07-26 21:29:43+00:00
That does explain the use of the term. They are reasoning about the systems in terms of what will happen (its procedure), but still describing systems as compositions of parts (as nodes in an AST, effectively) rather than as lists of instructions. And they teach how to analyze problems in order to design systems that way. And, of course, writing the program is inherently a self-directed imperative; you can't simply learn how to write programs and have programs exist as a result — you have to take that initiative.
by robomartin | 2025-07-26 21:30:20+00:00
Not really. I have done tons of manual wood working. I have 8 or 9 manual routers and a couple of CNC machines (real industrial ones, metal and wood). I have done just-about every type of intricate joinery using manual tools and inexpensive jigs. If you have metal CNC it's great because you can really get creative with jigs.

My comment wasn't intended to denigrate the tool or the approach. I am trying to understand the use case at scale.

Why?

Because if you are going to use this type of a tool onece or twice a year for an odd job, you don't need it. A $50 router will do just-about anything if you take the time to make a jig or jigs for the job. Again, if it is an one-in-a-while job, the time taken to build jigs is not important.

If you are making dozens or hundreds of something, forget it. Not the right use case. A CNC router or, again, a set of jigs or fixtures is the ticket.

Oddly shaped material might be a use case, however, I cannot see this working on concave or convex material with any degree of precision. This, once again, depending on the nature of the work, falls under the realm of CNC (possibly 4 or 5 axis) or specialized jigs.

Having done so much work, I just can't see dropping that kind of money for something that isn't likely to give me any real advantages. It will get used a few times due to the cool factor and then just sit on a shelf while I get real work done using manual or gantry CNC tools.

I've probably built hundreds of custom workstations using 100% manual tools, jigs and fixtures. It works, you can get amazing precision and repeatability and there's no limit to what you can make. Best of all, if you need five people working on a project, making extra jibs and fixtures is easy and cheap.
by serbuvlad | 2025-07-26 21:30:47+00:00
Yeah, you need to have (I would argue basic) Linux sysadmin skills. If you don't have those skills, and aren't interested to learn them, then you shouldn't self-host, just because it's the hot new trend.

The thing I like the most is the area effect. I have those skills so 5-20 people get a self-hosted experience managed by me. But even so, many people will be left outside of any such area. This too, is fine.

My dad knows how to do basic woodworking, so if I need a simple piece of wooden furniture, I go to him. I have a friend who knows how to 3D print stuff (I know nothing about it) and another who's in medical school and gives me medical advice (including "go to the doctor" when the problem is not minor). But I don't have any friends which are good at car mechanics, so I go to the shop (and get charged) for all problems related to that.

Now, I do not live in the US, so maybe these sorts of relationships spanning wide fields are less common there, but the solution to rugged individualism doesn't seem to me to be "collectivism on a grand scale", be it corporations or the government. The solution seems to me to be "collectivism on a small scale", building friend-family groups that can solve the most common 80% of problems in most fields within themselves, and that reach into professionals from the larger collective for the other 20% of problems, or for the problems in fields they have no experience in.
Show HN: MLFCrafter – Modular ML pipeline automation framework in Python
by burakcvlk | 2025-07-26 21:32:51+00:00
Hi HN,

I'm Burak, and I recently built an open-source Python package called MLFCrafter.

It's a modular framework that helps you build and automate machine learning pipelines more efficiently — with reusable components like `CleanerCrafter`, `ScalerCrafter`, `ModelCrafter`, and a `FlowChain` system to connect them all.

My goal is to make data workflows simpler, more transparent, and production-friendly for anyone building ML projects.

GitHub: https://github.com/brkcvlk/MLFCrafter

I’d love your thoughts, suggestions, or contributions — especially if you're into MLOps or building reusable ML tooling.

Thanks!
by msla | 2025-07-26 21:33:03+00:00
> "It's 1900 UTC, X is awake from....err....2200 to 1400, so I can call now"

Assuming it's that simple of course. Like, you can do mental math about what UTC "officially means" for someone many miles away, but people coordinate with others even if it means their local schedule is not aligned with that ideal case. Time zones account for this by being wider or narrower than their Platonic 15° of longitude ideal in some places.
by vu0tran | 2025-07-26 21:33:29+00:00
Author here. Thanks for reading. I've been thinking about this for a long time. I used to work at Snapchat where a lot of the talking points were still centered around the "Social Dilemma".

As I've transitioned to working on AI, I think the average person doesn't understand how there's a gigantic underbelly that's just purely dedicated to pornographic use – whether that's in erotic roleplaying with LLMs, or generating pornographic images with diffusion models. It's massive, but largely not talked about and remains out of view.

From my experience, when you go from text to image, it's basically an order of magnitude change in the dopamine response.

When you go from image to video, it's essentially another order of magnitude.

What I'm trying to say is... I don't think we're ready for what's to come...
by fellowniusmonk | 2025-07-26 21:34:04+00:00
In the future it will be easier to mine private notes for novelty.

I've developed a pretty unqiue approach to naturalistic non-arbitrary universally binding morality that has fixed my Ai alignment issues (without being able to retrain their model off their weird utilitarianism), but I'm not highly motivated to share it, it'll get around eventually if humanity doesn't implode.