MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by kaoD | 2025-07-25 18:45:58+00:00
I like how Temporal[0] does this. What you were dealing with is Temporal.PlainDate[1], i.e. a date with a calendar associated but no time or timezone (might be due to being implied but also might be irrelevant, like in birthdates).

Temporal has other cool types, each with distinct semantics:

- Instant: a fixed point in time with no calendar or location. Think e.g. "the user logged in at X date and time" but valid across the world for any timezone or calendar system. This is what we usually use "Unix UTC timestamps" for.

- ZonedDateTime: like an Instant but associated with a particular calendar and location. Think an Instant but rendered "real" into a calendar system and timezone so the user can see a meaningful time for them.

- PlainDate: already discussed. Think e.g. birthdates.

- PlainTime: think "run task every day at 6:30pm".

- PlainDateTime: like an Instant but associated with a calendar system, but no timezone. Think e.g. what a user would insert in a datetime picker, where the timezone is implied instead of explicitly selected.

- PlainYearMonth: think e.g. "we'll run our reports during October 2025".

- PlainMonthDay: think e.g. "my birthday is June 13".

- Duration: think e.g. "the task ran for 3hrs 30min".

Also see its important concepts[2].

[0] https://tc39.es/proposal-temporal/docs/

[1] https://tc39.es/proposal-temporal/docs/#Temporal-PlainDate

[2] https://tc39.es/proposal-temporal/docs/timezone.html
by bigstrat2003 | 2025-07-25 18:46:36+00:00
> today named "kibibyte" though in that day that word didn't exist yet & it was just a kilobyte and the base 2 inferred from context

That is still what most people do. Only very pendantic individuals insist on using KiB, etc. Normal people are just fine inferring from context whether base-2 or base-10 is meant.
by os2warpman | 2025-07-25 18:46:46+00:00
I do not think you are correct.

D-subminiature connectors are codified by both IEC 60807-3 and MIL-DTL-24308K.

Neither IEC 60807-3 nor MIL-DTL-24308K "standardize" or "codify" D-subminiature connectors into DA/DB/DC/DE sizes.

Is there an actual standard referencing DA/DB/DC/DD/DE? It wasn't linked in the article.

I do not think there is, and I think that everyone claiming that DA/DB/DC/DD/DE is a "standard" is wrong.

After all, we 100% DEFINITELY want to be "correct". Words like "standard" have meaning.

It appears DA/DB/DC/DD/DE is just a trade practice started by Cannon. Maybe that's why the "standardized" and "codified" specifications refer to sizes 1 through 5 (or 6).

If we want the opinion of the ultimate arbiters of standardization, both Digikey and Mouser adhere to "the standard" by organizing shell sizes into IEC 60807-3 and MIL-DTL-24308K-compliant numerical sizes with letters in parentheses to denote that the letters ARE NOT a standard.

The most likely reason that DA-DE sizes are not in the standards is that DA-DE were once trademarks or otherwise proprietary designations created by Cannon. Indeed, practically the only consistent and quasi-official spec sheets that list the A-E sizes are published by ITT Cannon but even they reference the actual standards (e.g. "E Size 9 (MIL-DTL-24308 Size 1)").

I assert that DA-DE are proprietary designations created by Cannon (now ITT Cannon) and calling them a "standard" is incorrect, IN AN ENGINEERING CONTEXT.

In support of my position I have referenced both IEC 60807-3 and MIL-DTL-24308K and provided real-world examples from domain experts. I have also found pdfs for DIN 41652, CECC 75301-802 and referenced spec and marketing materials for Amphenol, Assmann, and Farnell/Newark and the only instances of a "standard" is when they list A-E sizes as an afterthought to aid people who are not following the actual standard to source standards-compliant parts (or ITT Cannon).

What is there, besides blog posts, to show that I am not correct?

edit: As a certified, triple-audited, ISO 9001-compliant weirdo, I am going to write up a nonconformity report, digitally sign it, print it out, manually sign it, then stamp it, then initial the stamp, then get it co-signed, stamped, and initialed, then scan it, then upload it into BMS, then print it out again, write the document control number on it, stamp and initial next to the document control number, have a second engineer stamp and initial it, and then hand it DIRECTLY to Quality if anyone ever refers to D-Sub connectors using non-standardized nomenclature ever again.

This is serious business and we are serious engineers here.
by the_af | 2025-07-25 18:46:56+00:00
In discussions about this topic, in almost every place I see them, lots of people (against this censorship) are going "I don't play this kind of games" or "I don't personally care about tentacle fetish" (or whatever).

I don't get this. Let's say it openly: what's the problem with sex and nudity in games? Why is it so unacceptable -- that even people against the censorship must loudly proclaim it's not "their thing" -- but violence, guns, war, etc are not? Or not enough to pull from the stores, anyway?

What I don't care about are the finer points of whether this technically counts as "censorship", because in pratice it is. There SHOULD be a place to buy games which depict nudity and sex. The quality of those games is not and should not be the focus of conversation (e.g. "they are AI slop" or "badly made", etc), because that's NOT what bothers the people doing the censorship -- they'd also be against the best, AAA made, high quality games with sex and nudity.

Again, I ask: what is wrong with sex and nudity in games, that makes it worse than gore, violence and war? Why cannot whatever age-restriction measures taken for the purchase of violent games be also applied to sex games?

Finally: we all know they are not going to stop at this, right?
by tonymet | 2025-07-25 18:47:00+00:00
thanks. Yeah I think there are a lot of ways to decouple App store from publisher and auditor . That way the publisher can retain autonomy / control , while still developing trust with the consumer.

We could do better in our trade at encouraging best practices in this space. Every time there's a breach , the community shames the publisher . But the real shame is on us for not establishing better auditing protocols. Security best practices are just the start. You have to have transparent, ongoing auditing and pen-testing to sustain it.
by munksbeer | 2025-07-25 18:47:18+00:00
This is a slightly shallow way of looking at productivity gains. You benefit from productivity gains across every industry. Without consumers, there is no capital. So you, the consumer, benefit from increased productivity, even if it means that somewhere, someone, lost out. We just have to go back to the original luddite example. It is cliche for a reason. A quote:

"The tragedy is that although these groups of workers did suffer from the deployment of new technology, over time, the general population benefitted from cheaper clothes, lower prices and new jobs in other sectors of the economy."

Obviously, as a developer, I don't want to lose my career. But am I a hypocrite? Are you a hypocrite for buying anything that is now manufactured by automation, putting people out of jobs? I'd say yes.
by dlcarrier | 2025-07-25 18:47:48+00:00
I had assumed that the wires in the jack would rest along the bottoms of the blades in the plug, but I guess if it was never designed for high current applications, the contact area wouldn't be a consideration.

It took a few tries to get it right, but it's amazing that PoE is even an option given how far it is outside of the scope of what the cables and connectors were designed for. I've heard of locations that use it for power, instead of 120 V outlets, because it's cheaper and safer and most portable high-current appliances use batteries, while fixed high-current appliances use 240 V outlets.

Hot plugging is always a challenge, especially with direct current, and negotiation prevents that from being a problem while making a connection, but I never considered that unplugging isn't negotiated first. I wonder if IEC has ever considered using a locking latch, like an EV charger.

I have a PoE camera that I sometimes unplug to restart it, when it freezes up and I can't restart it from the web interface. I'll be sure to turn that port off first, before unplugging it.
by MrScruff | 2025-07-25 18:48:30+00:00
Sure, I just think it's important to be precise about the language, and this type of distinction is important in a lot of other aspects of life. Generally if an image is intended to evoke a sexual response, we would classify it as pornographic (though not always). An image that wasn't intended to evoke that response may still do so, but that will be context and viewer dependent.
by Nevermark | 2025-07-25 18:48:40+00:00
That is not true. A topological taurus can be flat or not.

A physical taurus embedded in our 3D universe, i.e. a donut, cannot be flat. Which may be the confusion.

But video game spaces are neither logically embedded or restricted by our 3D space. All its physics, including its spacial topology and geometry, flat or otherwise, were completely up to the game designers.

And the Asteroid game designers chose a flat space.

• Two parallel line segments stay parallel, no matter how long you extend them. Or how many times they wrap around the Asteroid space. (They also never intersect, but can overlap, just as in any flat 2D space.)

• Any number and distance of moves in any two perpendicular directions, are commutative. I.e. you can change the order of the moves, and you will still end up at the same spot.

• The three angles of any triangle in Asteroid space adds up to 180 degrees.

None of which applies to the surface of a donut.
by diginova | 2025-07-25 18:48:55+00:00
True, thanks for clarification

that would be this one - https://risingentropy.com/how-to-draw-lambda-diagrams/ as I just started learning lambda calculus and this one helped

Also this is where I got the interest from - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RcVA8Nj6HEo
by l-albertovich | 2025-07-25 18:49:02+00:00
You know it's not about the disagreement, it's about that toxic need to be a smart-ass that's so prevalent in social media (including this platform).

I would've loved to engage in a conversation about coding styles such as MISRA, CERTs or even the small tweaks such as the one that offended you so deeply but you wasted the opportunity to engage in a constructive convesartion and instead chose to nitpick the "reformatting" thing (seriously, I just moved things around slightly, it's the same thing) or the nothing-burger "bug"...

I don't know, maybe I misinterpreted you and if that's the case then I apologize but when I saw that code and felt the urge to play/doodle I thought it could be a fun way to connect with someone over something silly and I just got disappointed.
by bluescrn | 2025-07-25 18:49:19+00:00
These days there seems to be a fair bit of sex-inconsistent feminism.

With something like OnlyFans, where there's money to be made, the 'sex work is real work!' slogan comes out. And there's a reluctance to criticise big porn sites even after claims of links to sex trafficking etc.

But at the same time, scantily-clad videogame characters designed to appeal to the male gaze are deemed unacceptable/objectifying/regressive. And 'sex robots' are seen as a horrifying prospect.
by pacbard | 2025-07-25 18:49:24+00:00
Not all null results are created equal.

There are interesting null results that get published and are well known. For example, Card & Kruger (1994) was a null result paper showing that increasing the minimum wage has a null effect on employment rates. This result went against the common assumption that increasing wages will decrease employment at the time.

Other null results are either dirty (e.g., big standard errors) or due to process problems (e.g., experimental failure). These are more difficult to publish because it's difficult to learn anything new from these results.

The challenge is that researchers do not know if they are going to get a "good" null or a "bad" one. Most of the time, you have to invest significant effort and time into a project, only to get a null result at the end. These results are difficult to publish in most cases and can lead to the end of careers if someone is pre-tenure or lead to funding problems for anyone.
by aerostable_slug | 2025-07-25 18:49:35+00:00
Medicaid generally covers this population today (details vary by state). These aren't the large category of working poor who lack insurance, but rather indigent addicts who cannot manage their own affairs to the point where they are an active danger to themselves.

My worry is that people will see the dollar signs from Medicaid payouts and quickly set up "homeless rehabs" that do little but cycle the indigent through to get a check from .gov. Of course, some will claim that as a success since the patients aren't homeless for the duration of their treatment.
Show HN: ChronVer – Chronologic Versioning
by NetOpWibby | 2025-07-25 18:49:42+00:00
Hey everyone, I actually made this back in 2019 and have been using it since then but kinda fell off of making the library better since transitioning to using Deno more. A few days ago I upgraded the library[1], compiled the CLI to an executable[2], and updated the website[3].

I know SemVer is king but for my purposes, ChronVer is fantastic. I also didn't know about CalVer until a few days ago so it's good to know I'm in good company. Oh, and here's my short blog post[4] I made just now.

---

[1]: https://github.com/ChronVer/chronver

[2]: https://github.com/ChronVer/chronver/releases

[3]: https://chronver.org

[4]: https://blog.webb.page/2025-07-25-chronver-chronologic-versi...
by simpaticoder | 2025-07-25 18:50:04+00:00
You could publish them as a listicle "10 falsehoods organic chemists believe!" Because behind most every null result was an hypothesis that sounded like it was probably true. Most likely, it would sound probably true to most people in the field, so publishing the result is of real value to others.

The problem arises that null results are cheap and easy to "find" for things no-one thinks sound plausible, and therefore a trivial way to game the publish or perish system. I suspect that this alone explains the bias against publishing null results.
by ysnp | 2025-07-25 18:50:18+00:00
Vanadium implements per-site content filtering as a usability feature via Chromium's in-built filtering engine [0]. They currently use EasyList & EasyPrivacy filters which are quite popular and also a prominent default in uBlock Origin [1].

[0] https://grapheneos.org/features#vanadium

[1] https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock?tab=readme-ov-file#ublock-...
by strcat | 2025-07-25 18:50:21+00:00
The same thing could be said about any hardware. Pixels receive by far the most privacy and security research of any devices. They're by far the most secure Android devices and the only ones providing competitive security with iPhones. They're the only devices with even a reasonable level of security combined with proper alternate OS support. Our hardware requirements are listed at https://grapheneos.org/faq#future-devices. These are very reasonable requirements for industry standard security features, standard updates and the ability for GrapheneOS to use those standard security features. There are other devices with all the major features listed there but not the ability for GrapheneOS to use all of them. Updates are a major issue for all non-Pixel Android devices including the ones advertising lengthy support.

GrapheneOS is working with a major Android OEM towards their future devices providing the expected hardware-based security features and updates, unlike their current devices. The purpose of GrapheneOS is not specifically avoiding Google but if you want hardware from another large tech company to use with GrapheneOS, you'll have that option. The initial goal for these devices is providing a similar level of security and long term support to what we already have with Pixels. In the longer term, we want to have add hardware-based security features unavailable on Pixels or iPhones along with hardening below the OS layer.

For now, Pixels are the only viable option for us to use. We're actively working on changing that but we're not going to simply greatly lower our standards and support devices where we can't adequately protect users. There's no evidence of any backdoor and it's contradicted by how exploits are developed and used. There is plenty of evidence that other devices lack comparable security.

https://discuss.grapheneos.org/d/14344-cellebrite-premium-ju... shows an example where only the Pixel 6 and later / iPhone 12 and later have brute force protection which holds up against the most sophisticated company developing forensic data extraction tools. We have access to more recent documentation showing the same thing.

Why do governments buy exploit tools from NSO, Cellebrite, etc. and develop their own if they supposedly have backdoors in devices? Why would using a device from Samsung or Sony protect against it if they did?
by elijahdl | 2025-07-25 18:50:43+00:00
Pornography is the canary in the coalmine of protected speech. When you give a group the ability to censor content on the basis of "obscenity", then that group and other groups can use this to label other subjects they don't like as obscene. LGBTQ+ interest topics are especially vulnerable to this, as it is often made the case that being gay or trans is only about sex. You don't have to consume pornography yourself in order to benefit from a society that allows it.
by PaulHoule | 2025-07-25 18:51:21+00:00
Well, for hardcore chronology Julian dates are what you do.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_day

which are the moral equivalent of Unix timestamps with a different offset and multiplier. These work OK for human history but will break if you go far enough into the past or the future because uncertainty in the earth's rotation adds up over time.

If you don't care about timezones timezones may still care about you, if you want to minimize trouble it makes sense to properly use timezone-aware Zulu (GMT) dates for everything if you can.

In certain cases you might be doing data analysis or building an operational database for throttling access to an API or something and you know there are 16-bits worth of days, hours, 5-minute periods or something it can make sense to work relative to your own epoch.
by uncircle | 2025-07-25 18:51:22+00:00
1. Proof-of-work is a feature.

2. Just do the conversion at the time of sale.

3. Government prohibition and restriction of our rights is a terrible problem and it's why Bitcoin was invented in the first place. It's a necessary fight if only to keep government power in check, unless one really believes the State is always right and always has our best interest in mind. I don't.
by WarOnPrivacy | 2025-07-25 18:51:58+00:00
ed: In 1800s, Sanitariums were built by dedicated people to provide humane care for our mentally ill. They commonly provided the best care we knew how.

In the 1900s, the committed directors, orgs and philanthropists who long resisted degrading pressures died off. Govs eventually took over.

Pols/Public weren't as dedicated to safe treatment and spaces. Funding dwindled and the quality of care fell off, often to dangerous levels. The 1980 MHS act was passed to curtail the downward spiral but it was repealed in 1981 by the following administration. The sudden reversal ended improvements before they took root and MI care was disrupted at every level. By 1990, our mentally ill had swelled the ranks of America's homeless.

There's been little improvement since. State institutions are over capacity. Many are among the worst spaces in America and the better ones aren't much better.

This EO was written with the knowledge that we have no safe quartering available for mental health patients.

This bill was also written with the knowledge that will always be space for them in prisons.

By design, we are in the 1700s again.

refs: https://www.nursing.upenn.edu/nhhc/nurses-institutions-carin...

https://projects.tampabay.com/projects/2015/investigations/f...
by tonymet | 2025-07-25 18:52:31+00:00
also i remember maybe Facebook trying to do this when they acquired Parse. For a while they were promoting developers host their backends on Parse / FB .

The idea has merit. You have to relinquish some control to establish security. Look at App Store, Microsoft Store , MacOS App store -- they all sandbox and reduce API scope in order to improve security for consumers.

I'm more on the side of autonomy and trust, but then we have reckless developers doing stuff like this, putting the whole industry on watch.
by salleisha | 2025-07-25 18:52:33+00:00
Free Tax Calendar for Startups generated in seconds. Answer a few questions and get your personalized calendar.

Taxes and bookkeeping for early-stage startups in Delaware are dead simple. Stay on top of your tax deadlines, get your books done, and file taxes on time - that's it. AI will guide you along, so you can concentrate on what matters - building your startup.
by mfrye0 | 2025-07-25 18:52:59+00:00
Haha yeah, it does feel a bit weird.

I often work on large, complicated projects that span the whole codebase and multiple micro services. So it's often a blend of engineering, architectural, and product priorities. I can end up talking for paragraphs or multiple pages to fully explain the context. Then Claude typically has follow-up questions, things that aren't clear, or issues that I didn't catch.

Honestly, I just get sick of typing out "dissertations" every time. It's easier just to have a conversation, save it to a file, and then use that as context to start a new thread and do the work.
by chrisjj | 2025-07-25 18:53:25+00:00
Quote:

In his techno-optimist manifesto, the entrepreneur Marc Andreessen casually voices his dream that we might ramp up clean-energy resources so quickly that everyone on earth could soon use 1,000 times more energy a day than is currently typical for people in developed nations. Just think what people could achieve! Sounds great. Except that a little physics thinking also shows that using that much energy would immediately cause planetary warming about 30 times faster than we’re experiencing today, and we’d all be dead in a few years. Not so great after all.
by sam_lowry_ | 2025-07-25 18:54:44+00:00
Hm... I am reading this on a 1600x900 screen of my T420s Frankenpad while sitting in dusk in a German campsite. I ordered the screen some 10 years ago off Alibaba or something, and it is exactly the resolution and brightness I need. I hope I will die before this Frankenpad, because contemporary laptops are awful in so many aspects.

You know... as you age, you really can't read all those tiny characters anyway.
by zer0zzz | 2025-07-25 18:54:54+00:00
I always found scheme to be a clean slate where no one’s high school experience benefited them in the first year.

My program did Java for the second course, which was very popular in industry and I loathed it.

I do think Python is not so bad to standardize on because it’s stood the test of time and is one of the most popular ways to write code for many disciplines and has applications outside of computer science so it helps everyone that takes the cs requirement even if they aren’t a cs major.

What im saying is Python can even serve as a better version of spreadsheets for folks that aren’t cs.
by djoldman | 2025-07-25 18:55:06+00:00
I think someone who learns computer science well from the theoretical side can pick up a new language quickly. After all, if it's turing complete, it's turing complete, they're all the same at that level.

Problems creep in when the person doesn't learn CS well, chooses an approach that is deeply reliant on overly complex/opaque libraries without good documentation, or the like.