MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by gloosx | 2025-07-31 15:16:58+00:00
1 cup baking soda, 1/2 cup citric acid, 1/2 cup cornstarch, 1/2 cup Epsom salt, 2.5 tbsp oil (like coconut), 3/4 tbsp water, 10–20 drops essential oil

Combine wet into dry slowly until it feels like damp sand.

Pack into molds, press firmly.

Dry for 24 hours before using.

Drop into a bath and enjoy the fizz!
by lumost | 2025-07-31 15:16:58+00:00
It's not so much a question about fairness, just that the employee and employer are playing different games. Acknowledging this and devising a compensation strategy which aligns incentives is important.

Employers play an iterated game where they will hire/release/develop many workers, Employees play a single game where they choose the firm that maximizes their compensation offer.

Once the employee joins, the incentives flip - employers can take advantage of the fact that employees can't move in less than a year to maximize output, while employees can take advantage of their influence on the organization to minimize expectations.

Hence employers offer strong bonuses, or pay above market to avoid this behavior. Supply/Demand influences what companies pay - but isn't the only influence.

Thinking that you can stiff your employees on equity compensation and have it go unnoticed is imaginary. Employees convinced of outsized valuations for equity compensation will quickly become disillusioned.
by Aurornis | 2025-07-31 15:16:59+00:00
I found the older manager tools podcasts to be more consistently helpful than the newer ones. I see 3/4 of your links are to old episodes, which tracks with my experience.

I sampled some newer episodes in the past few years and was not impressed. One episode was just the host and guest ranting about how remote work isn’t real work and how everyone needs to get back to the office, which was wholly unhelpful for me as a remote manager.
by 1dom | 2025-07-31 15:17:55+00:00
Thanks for the response, appreciated. It confirms my feelings though: there are already so many choices for an interface, why are you - a team of people who built a backend LLM - now spending your time doing front end stuff under the same backend product name?

This is sending a very loud message that your focus is drifting away from why I use your product. If it was drifting away into something new and original that supplements my usage of your product, I could see the value, but like you said: there's already so many choices of good interface. Now you're going to have to play catchup against people whose first choice and genuine passion is LLM frontend UIs.

Sorry! I will still use ollama, and thank you so much for all the time and effort put in. I probably wouldn't have had a fraction of the local LLM fun I've had if it wasn't for ollama, even if my main usage is through openwebui. Ultimately, my personal preference is software that does 1 thing and does it well. Others prefer the opposite: tightly integrated all-bells-and-whistles, and I'm sure those people will appreciate this more than me - do what works for you, it's worked so far:)
by myvoiceismypass | 2025-07-31 15:18:39+00:00
You can submit a conditional offer to buy on IPO day with your broker (I do this with E*Trade). You will have to fill out a form with more questions than normal, and are not necessarily guaranteed an allotment at the IPO price.

Edit (1 hour later): I was allocated 2 shares @ $33. My request was for 100 shares, fwiw.
by art049 | 2025-07-31 15:19:17+00:00
I hadn't considered this, but it would be really interesting to take it into account. Given that the size of the benchmark suites directly affects the false positive rate, and counterintuitively, the more benchmarks in the suite, the more the chances of false positives, even with super steady benchmarks. (Thanks, it could also be an interesting follow-up article!)
by jm4 | 2025-07-31 15:19:32+00:00
I'll see if I can find it. I don't remember the specifics on rust, but it sounded like they gave it a fair shot. It was basically the one to beat until they figured out it wasn't going to work. The decision to adopt Swift wasn't made on a whim and, frankly, I'm skeptical it will happen any time soon, if ever. I think it's one of those situations where they want to make it more accessible to a next generation of developers the same way Linux is adopting rust. Swift is actually a really nice language, despite being associated primarily with Apple. It would be cool to see higher adoption.

Ladybird has an interesting way of documenting web standards in code. They put a link to the reference doc at the top of a function and then each rule in a comment where it is implemented. It's very easy to follow and good quality code. Another project I recall having high quality code was KHTML. Not coincidentally, Andreas Kling worked on that one too.

There are examples here: https://github.com/LadybirdBrowser/ladybird/tree/master/Libr...

Anyway, the point is what they are doing is working well and Swift won't be ready for a while. If it ever happens, it won't be a rewrite. It'll more likely be a situation where it's written in both the same way Linux is both C and rust.
by ilikecakeandpie | 2025-07-31 15:19:40+00:00
Yeah there's a lot of terrible shit happening everywhere all the time and it's made worse by the fact that news outlets know they get more interest by showing the horrors instead of focusing on the good. I'm not saying that we as a people should put our heads in the sand and ignore or minimize what's going on outside of our sphere/echo chamber, but there's a lot of wisdom in the serenity prayer.
by Capricorn2481 | 2025-07-31 15:20:02+00:00
I've never had a colleague make up a method that doesn't exist and then hand it to me saying it was done. That's not tech debt, it's wrong in a way that's distinct from humans.

The problem with LLMs is they treat all context as significant. Even telling it to ignore previous context is just confusing it more. So Cursor gets hung up on dumb shit like insignificant linter errors or insisting that extracting a block of code to a function will fix a bug (what?). You add more cursor rules to keep it from doing these things, which doesn't focus it, it just pollutes the context more. It doesn't know when to ignore files it's already read. It just gets shittier and shittier.

I appreciate that I can tell someone where the problem is and they'll know what is or isn't irrelevant.

Edit: Here is something Claude Sonnet 4 told me today. I would expect this if I was talking to it for a while, not the second request.

"Used excludeSwitches (plural) instead of excludeSwitches"
by 9rx | 2025-07-31 15:20:04+00:00
> I'm not even sure I would call my experience "management" except companies kept naming it that.

What is a manager anyway? I've been in this industry for multiple decades and I honestly still have no clue. They are never willing to assert what they are working on, or what blockers they have, during standups. They aren't striking deals with clients. They aren't building the product. They demonstrate no visible function. What, exactly, are they doing behind the scenes?

That's not to imply they aren't doing anything. I just can't figure out what it is and I'd love to know more. The article says "Learn from them.", but I have never seen anything to learn from. It is all shrouded in mystery.
by Aurornis | 2025-07-31 15:22:03+00:00
> it winds up being a gigantic pain in the ass and almost always better for the company to simply pay them $200k as a settlement to said lawsuit. And that comes out of the budget of a department who doesn't have $200k to spare.

Lawsuits like this are more common than I expected before I got a peek behind the curtain, but in my experience companies aren’t rolling over for $200K settlements frequently.

The last time I was at a level in a billion dollar company to have some visibility into this, the company had a small team of corporate counsel who were pros at handling these cases. They would get a lot of suits from people hoping to get a quick payday and then spend a minimal amount of time actually engaging them. This either made them go away when the other side realized it wasn’t an easy win, or made them change their tune and ask for a very small settlement (four or five figures, not six).

And I’ve never heard of a company paying these settlements out of the budgets of small departments. That’s weird.

Nevertheless, even paying $200K to separate from a toxic employee would be a long term win relative to paying $200-300K (fully loaded cost with benefits) for multiple years while also risking them making your good team members leave and damaging your product.
by xp84 | 2025-07-31 15:22:18+00:00
This seems like a "glass half full/empty" question: The top quintile (or so) of developers need little but to be given a mission statement or overall goals and commit access, but some managers bog down those people with improper use of meetings, process that gets in the way, too much 'digital paperwork' (did you fill out all 15 fields of the Jira ticket? etc), etc.

The bottom quintile never get anything done and hopefully you have fired them or convinced them to stop being bottom-tier. For the rest, to accomplish good work they need (A) to give a shit, which often is directly under your influence: how much they think their boss appreciates and cares about them is important. (B) to know what their strengths and weaknesses are so that they can improve, and (C) to be allowed to focus on the important things and not be pulled in 100 directions, which a good manager constantly keeps aware of and constantly tries to tune. A bad manager fails to do A, B, and C, and as such their teams are less likely to accomplish things.
by shortrounddev2 | 2025-07-31 15:22:28+00:00
I haven't used a MacBook in years but when I did, their power management was actually the worst thing about them - this was before they moved to ARM, so I assume it has improved, but it was common for a MacBook pro to turn into a screaming hot chunk of aluminum which would burn your legs on contact and misrepresent the actual battery life available to it.
by littlestymaar | 2025-07-31 15:22:32+00:00
Why would anyone read the original perceptron paper in this century though? It's easy to know someone is bullshitting when they claim to have read 70 years old papers that aren't in themselves of any interest nowadays. (Like how many economists are quoting David Ricardo without having read it directly, because reading Ricardo is a very poor way of spending your time and energy).

Funny how you spent lots of time in this thread talking shit to professionals of the fields and then take offence when someone call you like the fool you are.
by turnsout | 2025-07-31 15:22:34+00:00
This is cool! I'm anxious to dig into Zig on an M1, and this helps.

Side note, the CSS is broken for me in Safari—I get this error:

Cannot load stylesheet https://blog.bugsiki.dev/assets/css/stylesheet.b609c58d5c11bb90b1a54e04005d74ad1ddf22165eb79f5533967e57df9c3b50.css. Failed integrity metadata check. Content length: 4943, Expected content length: -1, Expected metadata: sha256-tgnFjVwRu5CxpU4EAF10rR3fIhZet59VM5Z+V9+cO1A=
by hyperdimension | 2025-07-31 15:22:36+00:00
Did you post the essay anywhere? I've always had kind of a soft spot for Ted--not his actions, mind, but his manifesto raises some rather prescient ideas. I also think he was..."justified" in a sense; again, not in his actions, but his decision to check out of society, only for society to come back to get him.

I'm happy to be proven wrong about any of that though. It's been quite a few years since I read it.

I completely agree with your "Children of Ted" hypothesis, for that matter. Historically, oppression births revolutionaries, for better or worse.
by pauljara | 2025-07-31 15:23:14+00:00
This used to happen to my MacBook Pro, although it was a non Apple Silicon one. The issue was that I had changed the DHCP lease time on my router from the default to a really low value. I believe I had set it to 15 minutes. What I believe was happening was the MBP was waking up to renew its IP address every 15 minutes and by the time it went to sleep again, it was probably waking back up to repeat the process. Changing the value on the router back to its default completely fixed the battery drain issue on my MacBook Pro. I'd never have guessed the cause-effect except I made the change around the same time I purchased that new MacBook Pro and was paying more attention to any issues that might arise.
by nicoburns | 2025-07-31 15:23:21+00:00
> Is Dioxus (or Leptos) much more performant than Tauri/Electron?

For now it's largely the same. Both Dioxus and Leptos render using Tauri (or a web browser). For Dioxus, a Blitz-based renderer (Dioxus Native ) is in development which will change the story slightly.

I would suggest Iced if you're looking for efficient (I don't think it's any less featureful than any other Rust-based GUI). With honourable mentions for Slint and Vizia.
by aidenn0 | 2025-07-31 15:23:32+00:00
The T1100 was released in 1985 at 9lbs. The NEC Ultralight was 1988 at 4.4lbs and set the standard for "notebook" (as opposed to "laptop").

One of the reviews in TFA mentions that they considered it too bulky to qualify as a "notebook" computer. This computer was on the heavy side of normal for a "laptop" of the day, but definitely not light for the day.

[edit]

A more fair comparison might be the Compaq LTE (1989), which had a hard-drive and weighed under 7 lbs (if someone can find a more specific number let me know). The LTE/386 came out not long after this, weighed 7.5lbs and had a similar thickness.
by codeaether | 2025-07-31 15:23:49+00:00
The article makes two points—one about software performance, the other about development performance. On the topic of software performance, I think the best explanation I got came from the great Prof. Charles Leiserson’s MIT course on performance engineering: performance is a currency. It’s something we spend to gain other qualities—safety, rich features, user-friendliness, and so on. At the end of the day, a computer can executes about 100 simple primitve instructions. The reason we have a software industry is because of speed.

https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/6-172-performance-engineering-of...
by MPSFounder | 2025-07-31 15:24:25+00:00
This, I believe, is the only issue with our form of gov. Lack of referendums. In the US, much of the current unpopular issues (Abortion ban, support for Israel's genocide using American taxpayer's taxes, lack of regulations on data harvesting) could be circumvented. I believe the optimal way to avoid these is 1) an educated populace and 2) referendums. The people who were given objective facts, free of propaganda and private interests, decide accordingly. If the majority believes in something, then we the people decide. Congress and the senate have been too bought up by private interests, that starts with campaigning (you receive x millions, from a lobby group (AIPAC for instance), and every legislation that affects their interests has to go through them). I dated a girl who was a lobbyist in DC, and relocated back home. It is unbelievable what goes on behind the scenes. Much of us do not recognize for instance the extent to which fossil fuels or car dealerships dictate how we live our lives. We may be aware of it, but there is a bureaucratic apparatus built in DC, at least 50x the size of congress, that strips We the people of power.
by ratelimitsteve | 2025-07-31 15:24:57+00:00
Hear me out: it's your scarcest resources and also a certain amount of waste is not just expected but necessary. This article starts with the phrase "Like many people, I have most of my best ideas in the shower." What's happening when you have shower ideas is something called the default mode network (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Default_mode_network) is activated. It's basically "What you're thinking about when you're not thinking about anything" and it's how your brain builds relationships between facts. It's usually where you do your thinking about yourself, about other people and the past and future, as opposed to what is called the task-positive network which is when your thinking is focused on concrete things in the here and now. What's interesting about the default mode network is that it's the source of those "a-ha!" moments because, unconsciously, its actually been analyzing the problem, building potentially insightful connections between ideas and integrating those ideas into what you already know.
by matrss | 2025-07-31 15:25:51+00:00
So with a fresh installation of one of those alternative conda clients and no user intervention it won't happen, right? On top of that you can block access on the network level as well.

Sure, when your employees are outside of the corporate network they can still download stuff from the default channels, but in the end it is no different than any other license violation they could do. At least with Anaconda there is a semi-effective fix.
by judofyr | 2025-07-31 15:25:56+00:00
Lock-free data structures does not guarantee higher throughput. They guarantee lower latency which often comes at the expense of the throughput. A typical approach for implementing a lock-free data structure is to allow one thread to "take over" the execution of another one by repeating parts of its work. It ensures progress of the system, even if one thread isn't being scheduled. This is mainly useful when you have CPUs competing for work running in parallel.

The performance of high-contention code is a really tricky to reason about and depends on a lot of factors. Just replacing a mutex with a lock-free data structure will not magically speed up your code. Eliminating the contention completely is typically much better in general.
by Tainnor | 2025-07-31 15:26:09+00:00
Yes. I've seen proofs fail after a mathlib update because the behaviour of simp changed. I've never seen it do less after an update (so far), but sometimes it'll simplify more and then the next steps may fail to work.

I've since adopted the suggestion (that is afaik used in mathlib) to never use bare simp unless it closes the current goal directly. Instead, if you write simp?, Lean will run the simplifier and tell you exactly which theorems it used (in the form of simp only [...]) which you can then insert into the proof instead.
by dismalaf | 2025-07-31 15:26:18+00:00
You're right, it's not an apples to apples comparison, just like running any business will yield more than straight investments.

But opportunity cost is a thing. No land equals no farm and no opportunity for that return.

If not farming, what kind of job can the would-be farmer get and how would they accrue enough capital for their return on T-bills + income to equal their farming income paying off the land? Also my calculations didn't consider that the land value would rise, which it almost assuredly would.
by happytoexplain | 2025-07-31 15:26:23+00:00
You're against leaving pets alone, which is reasonable, but your original premise is that using a service so that your pet isn't alone is also bad, for other reasons. You can certainly believe in both things, but you keep switching gears when it doesn't make semantic sense based on who you are replying to, and worse, you keep switching between normal writing and a flame-baiting style.
by tamirzb | 2025-07-31 15:26:33+00:00
If you are worried about your Google account being banned for using ReVanced (not that I saw any evidence for anything like that so far but I agree that there could be a scenario like this some time in the future), for years now I've been using a separate Google account only for YouTube. This account essentially only contains my YouTube viewing history and nothing more. I have yet to see any disadvantage in this separation
by mindslight | 2025-07-31 15:26:44+00:00
[2003]. I don't see how a description of the problem from 20 years ago, with a proposed solution much different than what is being done at the moment, has any relation to what I said.

I agree that the looting of much of our industrial base was a terrible thing to let happen. That doesn't mean applying a solution that would have been appropriate decades ago will have the same effect now that the horses have long ago left the barn. It's merely setting us up for the next trend by which we will be sold off.
by ssbash | 2025-07-31 15:26:57+00:00
> Tesla used to sell Model S vehicles with software-locked battery packs. This was a way to offer different range options without having to make production more complicated with different battery pack sizes.

> Later, Tesla started to offer owners of those software-locked vehicles the option to unlock the capacity for an additional cost. Tesla phased out the practice over the years, but the company still used software-locked battery packs when doing warranty replacements of battery packs of certain capacities that it doesn’t produce anymore.

Upgrading the head unit for a 2013 Model S triggered an error and reverted this old generation battery to software lock.

This clearly was a software bug and Tesla reverted it for all customers using these older batteries.

This has literally nothing to do with subscriptions (the word subscribe isn’t even in the article once). I don’t even think you read the article.
by nylonstrung | 2025-07-31 15:27:10+00:00
If you set up a GoFundMe or something I'll send some

I'd probably suggest you post about your experience with this in a way to relates to your experience as a dev since it seems you write about technical stuff?

I'm thinking about that blind guy recently talking about Linux accessibility making blindness a lot more relatable to people on sites like HN, who also are more likely to have disposable income to donate
by danans | 2025-07-31 15:27:13+00:00
> To what end was this done? Is a gay man a worse cop or bureaucrat?

We seem to need an internal enemy to blame for our societies' problems, because it's easier than facing the reality that we all play a part in creating those problems.

Gay people are among the oldest of those targets, going back to at least the times of the Old Testament (i.e. Sodom and Gomorrah).

We've only recently somewhat evolved past that mindset.
by tialaramex | 2025-07-31 15:27:14+00:00
You know how a modern language like Rust doesn't have the unstructured control flow with features like "goto"† but only a set of structured control flow features, such as pattern matching, conditionals, loops and functions?

Structured Concurrency is the same idea, but for concurrency. Instead of that code to create an appropriate number of threads, parcel out work, and so on, you just express high level goals like "Do these N pieces of work in any order" or "Do A and B, and once either is finished also do C and D" and just as the language handles the actual machine code jumps for your control flow, that would happen for concurrency too.

Nothing as close to the metal as Rust has that baked in today, but it is beginning to be a thing in languages like Swift and you can find libraries which take this approach.

† C's goto is de-fanged from the full blown go-to arbitrary jump in early languages, but it's still not structured control flow.
by lucumo | 2025-07-31 15:27:21+00:00
This triggered me to retest. Let me first apologize for calling you a liar. It's possible that you saw this.

I tried your formulation on the ChatGPT homepage in incognito mode (to rule out personalization for me). It said 2, so it's possible you saw that as well. I tried the same experiment again (new incognito mode, same phrasing) and it said 3.

That made me curious if phrasing made a difference and how often it would go wrong.

I tried 5 times with my own phrasing ("So, how many Rs in strawberry?") and got 5 times 3 as an answer.

I tried 5 times with your phrasing ("How many 'r's are in strawberry?") and also got 5 times 3 as an answer.

So 2 is an answer that can be given, but seems to be rare. At least in my tests.
by ieuanking | 2025-07-31 15:27:56+00:00
Love this piece and super agree that too much meritless physics is being published. It almost feels like the "vibe" stamp is an admission of inexperience. Are we just calling casual fun hobbies vibes? I'm all here for learning and growth, but OMG, everyone has a theory of everything, acting like Terrance Howard shamelessly.