MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by vettyvignesh | 2025-07-17 11:34:34+00:00
>Actually I'd suggest people don't just accept all feedback

If you read the whole para :)

What I suggest: listen to everyone and everything, but internally filter what’s actionable versus what should be addressed. More importantly, after receiving feedback, thank the provider regardless of whether they were right or wrong. Then share recent instances where you made corrections based on their suggestions.
by rickdeckard | 2025-07-17 11:34:40+00:00
The hard reality is that there is no PAYING market for such a device, because when it comes to the point-of-sale, most people still choose the normal-size device with better screen/battery/camera.

This is equivalent to something I called the "QWERTY paradox" more than a decade ago:

Back when the Smartphone market exploded, people disliked typing on a touchscreen and repeatedly stated that they want a device with a physical keyboard.

There was plenty of evidence, surveys, market studies, trend predictions, devices for these "Messaging-centric" use-cases were always part of this market-demand roster.

But whenever someone answered the call and built a Smartphone with QWERTY keyboard, the product failed commercially, simply because also to people claiming they want such a phone, at the point of sale they were less attractive than their slimmer, lighter, all-screen counterparts.

Every major vendor went through this cycle of learning that lesson, usually with an iteration like "it needs to be a premium high-spec device" --> (didn't sell) --> "ah, it should be mass-market" --> (also didn't sell).

You can find this journey for every vendor. Samsung, LG, HTC, Motorola, Sony.

The same lessons were already learnt for small-screen devices: There was a "Mini" series of Samsung Galaxy, LG G-series, HTC One, Sony Xperia. It didn't sell, the numbers showed that it didn't attract additional customers, at best it only fragmented the existing customer-base.

Source: I work in that industry for a long time now
by irchans | 2025-07-17 11:35:32+00:00
When I was in eighth grade my advanced algebra teacher said "I wonder if you always did your homework in pen, would you make fewer mistakes." That was 45 years ago. Now I am a mathematician and I have done 95% of my math in pen since then. I'm not sure how much it helped, but as you said maybe I think a bit more before I write because I don't like scratching out mistakes.
by reisse | 2025-07-17 11:35:38+00:00
> Symbian was as far as I know the last mass market open phone platform for developers.

Have you actually used it or developed anything for Symbian?

It was neither "open" nor "for developers". Some of the sources were available, but unlike Android, you couldn't rebuild the OS from scratch and load onto your device.

You couldn't just build and run your own apps. You had to obtain certificates from phone manufacturer (Nokia) and sign them. Thankfully the security system had so many holes it wasn't a big obstacle.

J2ME was a second-class citizen, only to support a lot of existing J2ME apps from feature phones.

Qt was way too heavy for the devices of that time. Qt apps easily consumed 40-50 MB of 128 MB RAM, while C++ ones that used native APIs could fit in 5-10 MB. But the native API sucked. It was in a bespoke dialect of C++, riddled with a lot of generational legacy. "A lot of other frameworks" you mention were mostly stuff used by some single developer for their own apps, to workaround all the Symbian quirks.

Idk, I don't understand people trying to whitewash Symbian. It didn't die because of someone turning evil, Microsoft acquisitions, whatever. Ultimately it died because it was unacceptably bad for a modern phone OS. Been there, used it, don't want to, good riddance.

MeeGo, though, is an entirely different beast...
by eqarmada2 | 2025-07-17 11:35:41+00:00
Been working with Function ID databases lately to speed up RE work on Windows binaries — especially ones that are statically linked and stripped. For those unfamiliar, it’s basically a way to match known function implementations in binaries by comparing their signatures (not just hashes — real structural/function data). If you’ve ever wasted hours trying to identify common library functions manually, this is a solid shortcut.

A lot of Windows binaries pull in statically linked libraries, which means you’re left with a big mess of unnamed functions. No DLL imports, no symbols — just a pile of code blobs. If you know what library the code came from (say, some open source lib), you can build a Function ID database from it and then apply it to the stripped binary. The result: tons of auto-labeled functions that would’ve otherwise taken forever to identify.

What’s nice is that this approach works fine on Windows, and I ended up putting together a few PowerShell scripts to handle batch ID generation and matching. It's not a silver bullet (compiler optimisations still get in the way), but it saves a ridiculous amount of time when it works.
by like_any_other | 2025-07-17 11:36:33+00:00
Lowering it to 16 is a good start, but really it should be lowered to 0. Otherwise, how will those aged 0-15, "without a voice", prevent the older voters from confiscating all their possessions, sending them to work in the mines, and harvesting their organs once they're used up?

Honestly I'm surprised this hasn't happened already, given how they "have no voice"..
by dvdkon | 2025-07-17 11:36:58+00:00
Half an acre that you have to care about, mind you. And work is not the only place people go to in a city. Add all those other amenities other commenters already spoke about, and your half-acre would have to be in the middle of at least a mid-size town.

Obviously that would be nice, but not even HNers are rich enough to build rural villas in city centres.
by close04 | 2025-07-17 11:38:02+00:00
> and a phone needs 0.2W of energy to function

For an arbitrary definition of "function". I don't think a modern phone would achieve a meaningful function at that level. The cellular modem alone blows past that budget many times over. Even an old rotary phone went over 1W.

Apple's efficient 5G "C1" modem used in the iPhone 16e is still at ~0.7W. The Qualcomm models used in the iPhone 16 are 0.8-0.9W.
by closewith | 2025-07-17 11:38:08+00:00
> I pointed out that meat production is wasteful that's just a fact.

There are wasteful (and horrific) forms of husbandry, but it's not a fact that meat production is wasteful. That's an opinion that's contingent on the assertion that meat is not worth the resources used for production.

> Your response is to claim I must therefore support banning computers and children?!

Yes, I am showing you the absurdity of your statement. Exactly the same logic can be used (and is used by those with extremist opinions like your own) to show that reproduction, computing, travel, medicine, art is wasteful, because it's subjective whether any result is worth the resources required.

> That's not how optimization works. We can improve systems without descending into authoritarian micromanagement. By your logic, we should never fix anything because someone might take it too far.

To be clear, your statements above are already taking it too far by declaring for others what they should be able to spend their resources on.
by Retric | 2025-07-17 11:38:18+00:00
US’s effective debt burden, debt * (interest rate - inflation)/GDP, isn’t particularly high right now. Unfortunately some politicians seem to have decided unlimited increases in debt are ok. That makes lenders concerned driving up rates.

It’s unstable because of how quickly interest rates can change. Right now the 3.375% interest on 37.1T of debt - ~2.7% inflation = an effective interest rate of ~0.675% well below long term GDP growth rate. But that 3.36% is a significant increase over even 1 year ago. If it grows to 5% without higher inflation things spiral fast. https://www.jec.senate.gov/public/vendor/_accounts/JEC-R/deb...
by smingo | 2025-07-17 11:39:03+00:00
There are quite a few examples of very misguided educational strategies.

Whole Language[1] failed so many students, but had significant funding and guru-level support for decades. Brain Gym[2] is regarded as pseudoscience. Even Discovery Learning has had serious detractors.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whole_language 2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brain_Gym_International
by sjw987 | 2025-07-17 11:39:40+00:00
We needn't jump to the end of the world or human extinction, hence why I didn't understand the need for finalistic terms like doom. What many people believe is that life simply isn't going to be as good for the next generation(s).

You can already see the downward trend from our parents generation to ours, the downward trend (economically, politically and socially) within our own lifetimes and project that to the next generation. Keep in mind, our parents received an unlikely to be repeated boost in their fortunes (which was paved with the largest war we've ever had and good luck for us to be on the receiving end of most of the spoils of that war, rightly or wrongly). There's a huge list of issues making life worse for people right now, and many more being kicked down the road for the next generation.

I live in the UK, so I speak mostly with the context of my own country. That's the life I live and what I know. I read quite a bit about affairs in other countries, as I said, once a week, and the picture doesn't seem to be too unique country-to-country.

I don't want to list everything that would fall under the metric of measurement, because while I know it looks like a cop-out, it's honestly a huge list filled with points that we all know about (war, inequality, political shifts, cost of living crisis, climate change, changing cultural landscape). I could pick one and discuss it at length, but I don't know what that would do besides allow for venting.

The advance of science, medicine, and technology can be used as a reliable metric for improvement, but these alone can't balance out the negative socio-economic and political changes, especially when they're all so intertwined. It's great that science can provide GLP drugs for people to lose weight, but the counter-balance is that socially people are less inclined to do without. New technology is always getting better, but if it's just being used to revolutionise serving ads and selling subscriptions, that's counterintuitive. Antibiotics are becoming redundant faster than we can create new types.
by kotaKat | 2025-07-17 11:40:18+00:00
And remember — even if you turn off all those features in Workspace, Google will still forcibly make you pay more for the privilege.

I just got told my Workspace plan is hiking another $2 a month for “AI” features I already have turned off at an administrative level — so I guess Google gets to grope around my wallet for some extra change out of desperation.
by 0xffany | 2025-07-17 11:40:19+00:00
As far as I understand, Grove was at the helm when Intel started the Itanium project. Granted, he didn't see it to "completion", but poor choices were made even in his time.

He even stated the following in "Only the Paranoid Survive": One, don’t differentiate without a difference. Don’t introduce improvements whose only purpose is to give you an advantage over your competitor without giving your customer a substantial advantage. The personal computer industry is characterized by well-chronicled failures when manufacturers, ostensibly motivated by a desire to make “a better PC,” departed from the mainstream standard. But goodness in a PC was inseparable from compatibility, so “a better PC” that was different turned out to be a technological oxymoron.

One might think Itanium goes against that.
by ReaperCub | 2025-07-17 11:40:39+00:00
> Go pushes the complexity into the programmer, that is how one ends with source code like Kubernetes, when the language doesn't provide all the tooling.

I am not sure what you mean by this. I write go code pretty much everyday and that code looks vaguely the same as it would do in C#, or Python, or JavaScript.

> Python belongs to the complicated languages section, people that think Python is straightforward never bothered reading all the manuals, nor had to put up with all the breaking changes throughout its history, it wasn't only 2 => 3, that was the major event, every release breaks something, even if little.

I've read the manuals. Most docs appear to be reasonably well written, even if I find many of the examples a bit odd (I've never been a big fan of Monty Python, so the spam and eggs examples are all a bit odd).

The 2 => 3 change was probably a big thing for those migrating all the existing libraries, frameworks. But as someone that uses it for prototyping stuff, I barely noticed the difference.
by nick__m | 2025-07-17 11:42:02+00:00
I hate those messy wire on the bread board!

When I did my electronics technical diploma at CEGEP, we lost point if our wires were not perfect, they had to be of exact length, use only right angle, bus had to be color coded... I used to find that petty, my boards where on the messy side (but compared to the one from the article they were neat) but when I saw those horror that have more in common with an eurorack patch I understood what the teachers were trying to instill in us.

Wires placement are like properly formatted code, it helps with readability and even with debugability. Sorry for the rant, i an back to yelling at the clouds!
by sandworm101 | 2025-07-17 11:42:14+00:00
No. It is a fundamental data problem relating to sensor accuracy/precision. They are called "suicide burns" for a reason. Start the burn too late and you run out of time and smash into the ground. Start too early and you run out of fuel and smash into the ground. So you need a sensor with error bars similar to your safety window for the planned burn.

Let's say you need to start the burn within a +/-10m box to come to a stop 1 to 21m above the moon surface. You want a sensor with something at least 10m precision but preferably more like 1m. That would be the radar. But then say you have something like a GPS with +/-100m precision. Does that help? Your safe window is somewhere inside that 200m but you cannot be sure where until the radar comes online. So do you use the +/-100m info from the GPS? Do you maneuver to center yourself inside its error bars? All you can be sure of is that you are somewhere within that 200m and are 95% sure you are not within the 10m window. So you make a maneuver anyway. Are you now in any better an information position? No. You are still somewhere in the 200m box and are still very likely outside the 10m box. Heck, you might have been inside the 10m box and just moved yourself out of it. You just wasted fuel. The only logical thing to do is to ignore the GPS and wait for the better/actionable information from the radar. The GPS may give you a warm fuzzy but it doesn't actually help when you only have one shot at the burn.

(This problem is mirrored in areas like missile guidance. Running parallel sensors on a missile sounds like a good idea but in reality leads to confusion, wasted energy/range and reduced chance of getting to the target.)
by chneu | 2025-07-17 11:42:34+00:00
Economics is kinda like weather prediction. Most people don't understand what economists are saying and they react based on what they think economists are saying. The same is true for things like rain predictions in that people don't understand what the prediction is, so when it doesn't rain people think "the weatherman is never right" when that isn't what the prediction was saying in the first place.

That said, economics is a mostly bunk "science".
by dustinchilson | 2025-07-17 11:42:48+00:00
From a website owner's perspective makes sense, move to a controlled domain and I get my analytics again

From an Adblock user perspective, that was kinda the point, I don't want a site tracking me and I don't really care if I break notifications (which in most cases I don't want anyway). If I want the broken functionality I'll add a site to an allowlist once they're trusted. In the adblock arms race this is a bandaid that will get fingerprinted and blocked as well eventually

Ultimately the question is if the analytics data / notification functionality for roughly 30% of internet traffic (based on quick google search, who knows if that's accurate) so valuable to take on the burden of care and feeding of another web service?
by jsnell | 2025-07-17 11:43:20+00:00
> Either allow us to process and use your data however we want, or disable these existing features we've offered for many years

That's not an accurate description. It's not "however they want", it's pretty clearly scoped for the data being used across Workspace apps.

> such a great direction to take your service

Also, none of this is new. That setting has been around to control exactly those features for years[0]. It's off by default in some countries, on by default in others, depending on the local laws/regulations.

[0] Here's the archived documentation for the setting from 2021, https://web.archive.org/web/20210223060113/https://support.g...
by kurogai | 2025-07-17 11:43:42+00:00
That makes sense — if you’re monitoring from within the system and have access to files directly, that’s definitely a more robust way to detect changes.

But my use case is more external-facing.

So the only thing you can rely on is what the browser sees — HTML, DOM, JS. In that context, unexpected DOM changes (like a hidden login form reappearing, or a 403 turning into a 200) can be quite telling.

What do you think?
by N_Lens | 2025-07-17 11:44:15+00:00
From the website: "The internationally acclaimed 'Free and Open Source Software for Geospatial' conference is our annual global conference held in a different city each year since 2004. It regularly attracts over 1,000 practitioners and advocates for Free and Open Source Software for Geospatial."

I'm curious how much discussion there'll be about AI-controlled robotics tapping into geospatial data - especially given the massive investment surge we're seeing right now. If the convergence plays out the way some companies are betting big on, we might be looking at a genuine explosion of robotic agents wandering around physical space. Think less "Terminator" and more "really smart delivery drones that actually know where your porch is."

The timing is particularly interesting because several trends are converging: LLMs are getting better at spatial reasoning, edge computing is making real time processing feasible for mobile robots, and crucially, open geospatial standards (the bread and butter of FOSS4G) are becoming essential infrastructure for this robot-everywhere future.
Tell HN: Humanloop acquired, sunsetting Sept 8th
by BillinghamJ | 2025-07-17 11:44:32+00:00
Just received by email. Doesn't seem to be anything public yet

---

We hope this message finds you well. We're writing to share some important news about Humanloop's future and what it means for you as a valued member of our community.

Our news

We're pleased to announce that Humanloop has entered into a process to be acquired. However, as part of this process, we’ve made the very difficult decision to sunset the current Humanloop platform. We’re planning the sunset for September 8th, 2025—after this date our UI and API will no longer be available. Although the acquisition is yet to be formally announced, we’re reaching out now to give you as much notice as possible and minimise disruption.

You have been an integral part of our journey and we acknowledge that this news may come as a surprise and will likely disrupt your current projects and workflows that use Humanloop. We're committed to supporting you through this transition period as best we can.

Exporting your data

We want to ensure you have full access to your data, so we've prepared some tooling to help you export your data easily via our existing API endpoints. For organizations with extremely high log volumes, we can explore working with you on a tailored export solution. Soon after we sunset the platform, all customer data will be removed from our servers and backups—please begin migrating your data as soon as possible.

Our team will remain available through to September 8th to assist with data export and answer any questions about alternative solutions.

Thank you

Thank you for being such an important part of the Humanloop story. We're extremely grateful for the trust you've placed in us and are incredibly proud of what we’ve built with your support. Together, we’ve helped define industry standards for this new AI tooling layer of prompt management, evaluations and observability. Your feedback, collaboration and support have been a cornerstone for everything we've built and accomplished.

We're committed to making this transition as smooth as possible, so please don't hesitate to reach out for help. We’re excited to share more details soon about what’s next for us and what it means for the future of our mission.

Sincerely,

The Humanloop Team
by LightBug1 | 2025-07-17 11:44:59+00:00
I feel it's kind of become a cliche trend now driven by the likes of Naval et al to shit on macroeconomics. While I never took the models I studied or created to be scientific, I always found them useful to frame the economic world we lived in. Even if those assumptions rarely predicted outcome or achieved repeatability.

I'm lazy, so ... over to the LLM:

This Hacker News thread expresses deep skepticism about macroeconomics, portraying it as unpredictable, overly influenced by perception, and possibly aligned with elite interests. While these critiques aren’t baseless—macroeconomic models often struggle with forecasting and can embed optimistic assumptions—they miss the broader point: macroeconomics remains essential and useful, especially when viewed as a tool rather than a crystal ball.

Arguing for the Usefulness of Economics (especially Macroeconomics):

It provides a framework to understand complex systems Macroeconomics helps us make sense of national and global phenomena—like inflation, unemployment, growth, and inequality. It gives policymakers and the public a structured way to evaluate cause and effect. Without it, decisions would be made blindly or based purely on ideology.

Policy decisions are informed by macroeconomic tools:

Central banks use economic models to set interest rates. Governments use them to forecast tax revenue, structure stimulus packages, and plan budgets. While models aren’t perfect, they are better than flying without instruments—especially in crises like the 2008 financial crash or the 2020 pandemic.

Imperfect models still guide effective responses

Critics rightly point out that models don’t always converge or predict turning points. But the weather forecast analogy applies: we don’t expect perfect predictions, yet forecasts still help us prepare. Similarly, macroeconomic insights helped avoid depression in 2008–09, guide inflation control today, and shape climate and industrial policy.

Economics evolves and improves:

Like any social science, macroeconomics adapts. New models increasingly incorporate behavioral insights, inequality, financial instability, and even ecological limits—areas previously overlooked. The discipline is far from static, and many economists are leading critics of outdated assumptions.

Bottom Line: Yes, macroeconomics has limits—especially when models are treated as gospel rather than guidance. But dismissing it entirely because of its imperfections is like discarding medicine because not every patient gets better. Used critically and responsibly, macroeconomics helps societies navigate complexity, make informed choices, and anticipate risks—even when the future remains uncertain.