MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by bitmasher9 | 2025-07-07 03:42:54+00:00
Uncertainty can lead to reduced risk taking activity. Both hiring and firing have risk associated with them. This is probably a limited time impact and will change once people have a strong understanding of the current “trade war”, and an understanding of any impacts the Middle East conflicts will have on the global energy supply.

If you’re in business, look for opportunities where others inaction can benefit you. Maybe that’s quality talent available in the labor market.
by Walf | 2025-07-07 03:43:12+00:00
Because that's a colloquial name given to a range of specific symptoms people experience, and it is in the DSM, covered by 1.e.:

> Often has difficulty organizing tasks and activities (e.g., difficulty managing sequential tasks; difficulty keeping materials and belongings in order; messy, disorganized work; has poor time management; fails to meet deadlines).

The DSM doesn't list all minutiae of every general problem.
by Aurornis | 2025-07-07 03:43:32+00:00
That article is not claiming that “time blindness” is a real standalone condition. As the other commenter already explained, it’s not among the conditions with actual diagnostic criteria and agreed-upon symptoms.

The first sentence claims that it’s something people with ADHD might experience, not a specific condition. In other words, it’s just the therapy-speak way of saying “chronically late”.

Note that the date on the article is also very recent: Only a few months old. This date is after the trend was popular on TikTok. It was likely written in response to the trend, as a way of capturing search engine traffic from people searching for it.

This is representative of the issue I was describing: There’s a sense among some people that using the therapy-speak terminology for something transforms it into a different type of personality attribute, for which they can’t be held responsible. Saying “I have a problem with being on time” and “I have time blindness” are functionally equivalent, but some people want to believe they the therapy speak labeled version warrants different treatment.
by AdieuToLogic | 2025-07-07 03:43:32+00:00
> Reminds me of a story (which I've heard in slightly varying versions) that happened in the early days of IBM. A man had made a costly mistake, but Thomas Watson didn't fire him, saying "we just spent all that money educating you!"

> People learn by screwing up, and those can be the best lessons.

Precisely.

Had the author been fired for his actions, the only people who could learn from the situation would be those employed at that time. As each cycled out of the company, this lesson would be lost.

By addressing the error in judgement while retaining the author, the organization ensured the lesson would be passed on to each new generation of engineers without having to prescribe the policy dictatorially.
by aurareturn | 2025-07-07 03:43:52+00:00
I thought web3 was supposed to be some kind of decentralized compute, where rather than run on your own hardware or IaaS/PaaS you could make use of compute resources that vary wildly day-to-day in availability, performance, and cost, because they were somehow also mining rigs or something? But it's "decentralized" because there's not one entity running the thing.

Web3 is a rebrand of crypto scams. The 20018 crash exposed the crypto industry to how wide spread its scams were. So the industry rebranded to "web3". Nothing changed.

The scam message was that so many people got rich investing in web2.0 companies like Facebook. You can get rich too by investing in web3 (shitcoins & NFTs).
by sardine5 | 2025-07-07 03:43:59+00:00
It's somewhat device dependant - but between her Pixel 6 and my Pixel 7 - if we've got line of sight and the handset's not being held to our body (so in a handlebar mount or saddle bag) - 50-75m? I've been victim to the recent Microsoft layoffs, so have a bit of time to work on it at the moment - looking at adding longer range CodedPhy support this week (though that would only be available on Android)

It works best if there's 3 phones though - as it can route via the other if a link drops.
by zdragnar | 2025-07-07 03:44:49+00:00
The problem is conflating one's identity with the label allows a person to project all of their problems onto the rest of the world.

By "being" the label, one has little to no agency over it. Without agency, there is no responsibility, nor incentive to change. Without responsibility or incentive to change, there is no problem for the individual; rather the problem is everyone else.

This isn't just something that a person can do to themselves- it's something society can do to people. The phrase "bigotry of low expectations" describes a behavior of assuming that a label identifies a person, and that they have no personal agency to overcome it. The behavioral shift of everyone around that person molds the image the person has of themselves to a limited, restricted version of what they're actually capable of.
by tootie | 2025-07-07 03:45:49+00:00
I am leery to discount anyone's mental health struggles because often enough they are very real. But it can be galling to see very functional people blame the smallest imperfection on a condition many people find debilitating. ADHD and Autism are prevalent ones now, but it also is almost a cliche to call yourself OCD for a bit finicky. I think there's also an element of blaming your shortcomings in life on an incurable condition so it's not your own fault.
by Buttons840 | 2025-07-07 03:46:55+00:00
My definition is a high-bar that is undeniably AGI. My personal opinion is that there are some lower-bars that are also AGI. I actually think it's fair to call LLMs from GPT3 onward AGI.

But, when it comes to the lower-bars, we can spend a lot of time arguing over the definition of a single term, which isn't especially helpful.
by mcdeltat | 2025-07-07 03:47:08+00:00
I have wondered - but have no evidence either way - if the stress we encounter nowadays differs to stress of the past. At some point very long ago most of us were stressing about things like food, water, surviving the night. Now most of us are stressing about things like work pressure, debt, global disasters. I wonder if the nature of the stressors have changed from immediate and acute to increasingly abstract and chronic? And potentially, if the quality of life profile is different in the two cases due to different coping mechanisms?

Very anecdotal which makes me think this: immediate physical stressors like exercise are uncomfortable but I get through them fine. Chronic stressors like climate change are totally ruining my quality of life.
by Animats | 2025-07-07 03:47:56+00:00
Stablecoins can, when interest rates are reasonably above zero, support themselves with the interest on the money. That could potentially work. The industry tradition, however, is the promoters stealing the money.[1] Usually by investing it in something risky, with the intent of keeping the excess profits but dumping any losses on the stablecoin holder.

Trump has a stablecoin, "USD1". It's partly backed by Trump's memecoin, "TRUMP" Really.[2] What could possibly go wrong?[3]

[1] https://www.web3isgoinggreat.com/

[2] https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/usd1-the-cryptocur...

[3] https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/official-trump/
by ryandrake | 2025-07-07 03:48:20+00:00
I've never been a huge fan of Easter Eggs. From a risk management and QA point of view: there are a lot of things that can go wrong in a software project, why deliberately add something else not asked for, even if there was only a 1% probability that it would break? It just seems that the downside risk massively exceeds any potential upside. If something actually fails because of it and you have to write the postmortem, what are you going to say?
by jongjong | 2025-07-07 03:48:51+00:00
This is not the case because being able to make a widget cheaper than everyone else doesn't guarantee that you will be able to secure funding for your operations and secondly, it doesn't guarantee that you will be able to capture enough people's attention from media to make enough sales to keep you afloat or gain the required initial traction. Thirdly, your bigger competitors may deny the quality advantage of your solution (ruling out an acquisition), they might defensively take the position that "You're cheap and low quality". Quality is a subjective metric; if both products were put in front of a consumer, the consumer may very well confirm that your product is higher quality but that doesn't matter if you lack the means to get your product in front of enough people to begin with. Your know-how and abilities are worthless until a certain (very high hurdle) is cleared in terms of funding, media coverage and adoption.

Also, it's possible that your product could be cheaper to produce than your biggest competitor, but you won't know for sure until you reach the same scale as them; which you may never reach due, again, to the massive hurdles you have to clear to get started.

The software sector is full of high quality software which nobody uses and low quality software which everyone uses. There are software companies worth billions of dollars which produce software which all users nag about constantly. Sometimes software which people have to use daily, many hours per day. They hate it, they all agree they hate it, but they have to use it anyway because the boss says so and the boss doesn't need to use it.

Don't even get me started on the hurdle of regulations/compliance. The idea that the most efficient solution wins is a myth. Mostly, they lose and they don't just lose a bit, they literally lose completely and get NOTHING, not even recognition of their work.

Our society is full of highly skilled, capable, ambitious people who are totally broke. It's relatively feasible to get a corporate job paying a high salary contributing basically nothing of value... But try to do the BEST WORK of your life working for yourself and there's a very high chance you will get precisely $0 after your 5th startup.
by danpalmer | 2025-07-07 03:48:53+00:00
I built myself a tool that does something quite similar. It's a single no-dependency Python script that parses "tasks.md" in the root of the repo which contains a Markdown table of tasks, then has basic support for BLOCKED/READY/DONE/CANCELLED, dependencies, titles, tags, etc.

For a project that is just for me, it's exactly what I need – dependency tracking and not much more, stored offline with the code. Almost all of the code for it was written by Gemini.
by nine_k | 2025-07-07 03:50:19+00:00
People prefer widely accepted tokens of value, which are the few strongest currencies (USD, EUR, RMB, JPY, CHF, not much more). BTC has made enough inroads to be considered semi-widely accepted, and be useful as is in certain circumstances, but that's about it.

Blockchain is a useful technology, but, it appears, mostly not for carrying fancy coins.
by renewiltord | 2025-07-07 03:50:44+00:00
Haha it’s just the quest for uniqueness in a socially acceptable way combined with a desire to be protected by victimhood.

It’s pretty funny to see but it’s just kids being kids. The majority grow out of it and the truly mentally ill develop this Munchausen form.

Hopefully I’ve developed good tools to deal with it by the time my kids are older. The victim form is hard to break out of once you’re in.

The worst is there’s nothing to learn from these people. It’s like trying to learn sprinting from a guy who keeps yelling “As a peg leg, as a peg leg, …”

Useless. But it’s fine, I’ll pay your Medicaid.
by ggm | 2025-07-07 03:51:02+00:00
As a non expert, I found this fascinating. They compared mechanistic verification with 3 assessors, and seem to be saying it's at least as good.

They also make their scripting available.

On the whole I'd be more interested in how they rank the various consumer services (grok especially) for "truthiness" but perhaps laying the groundwork by establishing how mechanistic verification performs, is a necessary precursor.

Essay writers beware! Those cites are going to be more checked than before.
by suchuanyi | 2025-07-07 03:52:17+00:00
If you’re on a Pro account, it’s common to hit the usage limit in the middle of a long-running task. Claude Code will tell you you’re out of quota, and the reset time might be something like 3 AM.

If you’re asleep by then, you miss the chance to resume right when it resets. The script is just a workaround to automatically pick up where you left off as soon as the quota is restored.
by jowea | 2025-07-07 03:52:50+00:00
Web3 was quite a cryptoassets sector buzzword, but the decentralized part of that is "cryptocurrency".

If we take the buzzword seriously, yes there was more to it than microtransactions with cryptocurrency, but without personal wallets on the blockchain capable of those transactions the rest of the ideas like NFT tickets, Decentralized Finance etc are impossible.
by dcrazy | 2025-07-07 03:53:28+00:00
Carl Sagan had sued Apple the prior year for merely using his name as a project codename that was never going to be published anywhere or included in any customer product. John had placed an excerpt of a still-copyrighted text into a resource fork that would ship to customers—and in fact had already been burned to discs.

I think it would have been an overreaction to fire him, but it was absolutely within the realm of plausible outcomes.
by Aurornis | 2025-07-07 03:53:33+00:00
> If you were in the determinist camp, believing that all that one does was predetermined by prior environmental causes, could you still hold people responsible for their actions?

This is a good example of where over-thinking a topic in abstract terms causes some people to lose sight of the big picture.

Take a step back and think about what you’re saying: If nobody could be held accountable for their own actions, does the concept of accountability disappear? It’s a farcical claim.

But you’re right, this is essentially what is being argued: By invoking therapy speak and formal sounding labels, the person wants you to kindly box up any accountability or consequences under the label and direct them at the abstract notion of the labeled condition, instead of the person responsible.

This is why I experienced so many people getting worse at punctuality after learned the phrase “time blindness”: They used the therapy speak to transform themselves into the victim, at which point the pressure to improve their situation diminished because they believe victims couldn’t be blamed. The temptation becomes strong to label everything negative this way as it’s a nice escape hatch to externalize accountability.
by jjani | 2025-07-07 03:55:21+00:00
> But there are a few things we can learn from this:

> - if you give people the chance to place a label on themselves that makes them feel unique, they’ll take it.

This is almost the opposite of what we can learn about this, and the article does a great job at pointing that out. It's a very recent social phenomenon. Yes, that contradicts your abnornal psych class, but think about it. 20 years ago (in 2005), did anyone voluntarily, happily label themselves autistic, without any disgnosis, outside of such psych classes (outliers for obvious reasons)? In elementary, middle and high schools, at the workplace, in other majors? IME absolutely not, very much the opposite. The only ones who did so were the diagnosed, and then only mentioned it when very relevant. Let alone 100 years ago. Let alone the massive differences between different regions/cultures in desire for uniqueness, both historical and uniqueness.

This is a massive sociocultural phenomenon, absolutely not something inherent to the human psyche. Almost no one is born this way (strong desire to make themselves feel unique).
by alganet | 2025-07-07 03:56:24+00:00
I decided to look at it more closely.

It is massive, lots of papers analyzed, but just the Abstract part of each.

One way you could look at it is: some authors used an LLM to create the abstract from the paper contents. "Hey, there's a lot of new books with AI covers"

One other way is: There could be a correlation between LLM usage in the abstract and LLM usage during the production or writing of the paper. "Hey, I wonder if this book with an AI cover also was written by an AI. It should be investigated"
by pxoe | 2025-07-07 03:56:45+00:00
What is normal human behavior though? Is it some combination of things that's gonna end up being so rare that only so many people fall under it, and is it normal if it's so rare? Is it gonna be "what most/average people are", and if so, well then, isn't everybody gonna have something going on, and isn't that just normal then?

With how widespread it is, labeling, self-diagnosing, inquiring about yourself, is kind of normal human behavior. It is everywhere, and has been historically. Putting it like it's just 'labels for significant things' and then 'normal', and that these things would stand far enough apart to actually make a clear distinction without dismissing people in between is pretty much just wishful thinking. There's way too many things and even more combinations of then. It's gotten so complicated and convoluted only because it is that way. Wishing for a binary clarity in a complex world.
by Aurornis | 2025-07-07 03:57:17+00:00
Applying formal-sounding nomenclature does not transform accountability like you’re suggesting.

Also, being able to Google a TikTok-famous phrase and get hits from SEO-targeted blog posts like this doesn’t really make it official nomenclature. They’re just trying to capture traffic with trending keywords. This is a very obvious SEO article.

Saying “I have a problem with being on time” and “I have time blindness” are functionally equivalent. Applying therapy speak doesn’t change the situation.

This is all very much missing the point, though. Someone who believes they have “time blindness” should recognize that they have a higher need for additional measures to address their issue, including more use of time keeping aids, alarms, and even accountability from external parties. Trying to use a labeled condition to escape accountability for one’s actions is not only unhelpful, it goes against the entire purpose of therapy.

The problem becomes more clear when you imagine the same idea applied to other issues: If someone is constantly lashing out and yelling at people, they don’t get a free pass for saying they have “an anger issue”. They’re still accountable for the consequences of their actions, regardless of what name you put on it.
by eahm | 2025-07-07 03:57:41+00:00
Oh geez, for example in Italian to say here you say "qui", where I grew up I say "mchi" but my brothers say "mqui" or "mque", where I used to go to school they say "meque" with the weirdest sound.

To say what are you doing in Italian is "cosa fai" but I say "co fei" and my brothers "sa fei" and where I used to go to school they say "che fe".

These are just simple simple things but almost everything changes here and there and I can't put the sound with the words here, they actually sound different, and change where the actual accents are.
by tptacek | 2025-07-07 03:59:20+00:00
I lived in Lakeview (several spots) and just south of Uptown (on Montrose and Broadway, near the Jewel). I had never had a good cab experience. In particular, as I said, I'd often have to call, wait, and then call again when the cab didn't show up. The idea of getting a cab by waiting on Broadway --- I mean, maybe there was some time of day you could do that at? But at 8:30PM? Forget it.
by heavyset_go | 2025-07-07 03:59:33+00:00
Where are they going to farm?

This is a problem our ancestors faced with the enclosure of the commons. As dispossessed subsistence farmers, they had no other option to survive other than selling their labor. Their land was privatized and with it their way of life destroyed.

We still live in the world where the commons is enclosed, subsistence farming is effectively illegal.
by solumos | 2025-07-07 03:59:38+00:00
Not exactly. Internet Computer or Akash Network would be more closely aligned with "decentralized compute" — smart contracts in the EVM world aren't really meant to decentralize "general" compute, but they do provide primitives for programmable transactions. Those transactions can include a "token" as well as abstractions on top of tokens (e.g. a vault)
by Aurornis | 2025-07-07 03:59:50+00:00
FYI: SlimeMoldTimeMold has been heavily debunked across multiple topics. It was popular for a while in rationalist communities for the multi-part series claiming lithium in the water supply caused obesity, until everyone realized the author has a serious habit of misrepresenting sources, claiming citations say things they don’t, and omitting contradictory evidence.
by somenameforme | 2025-07-07 03:59:56+00:00
By "skill" I'm referring to something far more fundamental, perhaps trait would have been a better word. For instance sports are largely about athleticism, hand eye coordination, strength, and so on. And these all are largely transferrable. Similarly in mental domains I'm referring more about the ability to accumulate and process information while also using it as a tool think more outside the box, than as an ends in and of itself.
by jongjong | 2025-07-07 04:00:36+00:00
Same as what we have now but I think the moral filter applied would be stronger coming from a random citizen as opposed to a power-hungry citizen. Also, with randomness over the whole population, you can be sure everyone in congress and senate would be different every election cycle. So politicians won't be able to stay in office long enough to form meaningful alliances; they will not trust each other and thus watch each other better to prevent corruption.
by NoPicklez | 2025-07-07 04:01:36+00:00
I don't think its necessarily untrue.

20 years ago you didn't open your phone to see videos by anyone that called themselves a therapist or psychologist say you might have ADHD if you have these xyz common signs. Or if you struggle to have difficult conversations with your partner you might have grown up in a chaotic household.

All very loose, quick and ambiguous explanations that do not provide any balance.

If someone sees it and goes "Oh gosh that loosely explains why I do xyz" they will take it, because is confirming something or its providing an answer to something they deem they struggle with that they didn't have any answer for before.

It's part of the human psyche to try and understand and answer things and we have a confirmation bias that limits our ability to think of both sides of the coin, not just the one that's constantly popping up on our mobile phones from so called therapists.
by mhh__ | 2025-07-07 04:03:11+00:00
In equities for example, an option at a given strike let's you pay a little for insurance i.e. that you will have X amount of cash if SPX is at Y and so on.

This is very important for pension funds and so on because they have fixed liabilities like outflows.

All these things are is a way of moving risk around. Some people want risk, some people want to hedge — it's just as true for wheat as it is for bonds.

It's not so much price as risk.
by Aurornis | 2025-07-07 04:03:54+00:00
You’re conflating symptoms with conditions.

Having a single symptom does not mean someone has the condition. The diagnostic criteria for the condition for which you took that quote (out of context) is more comprehensive. It’s not a simple matter of doing Ctrl+F on the DSM and seeing that something can be a symptom or something else.

This is more obvious when you start thinking of other conditions: Feelings of sadness are a symptom of depression, but not everyone who has feelings of sadness has depression.

The misuse and misinterpretation of the DSM has become commonplace in parallel with the use of therapy speak.