MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by throw0101d | 2025-07-06 01:04:03+00:00
> Why is this in the fs layer then?

Define "fs layer". ZFS has multiple layers with-in it:

The "file system" that most people interact with (for things like homedirs) is actually a layer with-in ZFS' architecture, and is called the ZFS POSIX layer (ZPL). It exposes a POSIX file system, and take the 'tradition' Unix calls and creates objects. Those objects are passed to the Data Management Unit (DMU), which then passed them down to Storage Pool Allocator (SPA) layer which actually manages the striping, redundancy, etc.

* https://ibug.io/blog/2023/10/zfs-block-size/

There was a bit of a 'joke' back in the day about ZFS being a "layering violation" because it subsumed into itself RAID, volume management, and a file system, instead of having each in a separate software packages:

* https://web.archive.org/web/20070508214221/https://blogs.sun...

* https://lildude.co.uk/zfs-rampant-layering-violation

The ZPL is not used all the time: one can create a block device ("zvol") and put swap or iSCSI on it. The Lustre folks have their own layer that hooks into the DMU and doesn't bother with POSIX semantics:

* https://wiki.lustre.org/ZFS_OSD_Hardware_Considerations

* https://www.eofs.eu/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/21_andreas_di...
by femto | 2025-07-06 01:04:17+00:00
I find the first two responses "Perfect!..." and "Based on..." intensely annoying. They add nothing to the discussion and act as noise. This article crystalises a problem with AI: words are cheap to generate and expensive to read (just like spam). The AI should just do as it's asked and succinctly generate the poll. If asked "Why did you make these suggestions", it should explain why it chose those restaurants.

Edit: I'd also add that done "right" the AI should be clearly labelled as such. Its chat handle should include something like "AI", so the other chat users know exactly what they are dealing with, without having to know what "TripJam" or "TJ" is.
by akoboldfrying | 2025-07-06 01:04:30+00:00
Mostly I agree, but I think this statement carries with it an oversimplification of the world.

In practice, some of what it takes to do a given thing comes from thing-specific information (which is appropriate to ask questions about), and some comes from a background of experience in doing/studying other similar things (formally or informally). For complicated tasks it basically has to be this way, because there just isn't time to train a person up from scratch for each task -- a random person off the street could not perform surgery merely by first asking a sufficient number of questions about exactly how to do it. People find "stupid questions" alarming because they reveal holes in this important second category, and make people wonder what else important might be missing.

You could make the argument that it's better for society if everyone asks whatever "stupid" question comes to mind, because then incompetent people and charlatans will be quickly exposed and the harm they would do minimised. But it's not good for the charlatan!

I don't side with actual charlatans, of course, but most of the time I do side with people of imperfect competence, because that's most of us. Competence is improved by practice, and most tasks are low-stakes. If a person is already near the threshold of being perceived as unacceptably incompetent by others, and can discover the information they need via other means than by asking "stupid questions", that may well be the best way for everyone.

That's not to say that I advocate never asking stupid questions. In fact I would encourage people to lean more in that direction as a default setting -- they are the fastest way to get the necessary information. They just have a cost that it would be naive to ignore. It's a judgement call, is all I'm saying.
by tkgally | 2025-07-06 01:04:46+00:00
In Japan, the Yodobashi Camera chain has a web interface tied to their huge retail stores. The page for each product [1, for example] has a link to a list of stores where it is in stock [2]. If you’re in a hurry and near one of those stores, you can have it held for pickup later that day. If not, you can have it delivered.

I buy a lot from Amazon Japan as well, and I haven’t had the problems with shoddy or counterfeit products that others have reported. I don’t know if that’s just my luck or if Amazon Japan screens its suppliers better. But it’s nice to have strong competitors to Amazon in online shopping. In addition to Yodobashi, there are Rakuten, Yahoo Japan, Bic Camera, and Yamada Denki for a wide range of products, as well as Kinokuniya, Maruzen Junkudo, Sanseido, and others for books.

[1] https://www.yodobashi.com/product/100000001004349962/

[2] https://www.yodobashi.com/ec/product/stock/10000000100434996...
by BLKNSLVR | 2025-07-06 01:04:54+00:00
Lovely, but naive.

But naive in a way that most people (?) would like the world to be.

But ultimately, unfortunately, unrealistic.

Building has always been the kind of difficult that, had you known at the beginning then maybe you wouldn't have started. And still quickly and easily destroyed.

Keep creating and building, otherwise there's nothing else to do. Love the obstacles for challenge of defeating them, don't hate them for their existence. To build X you often have to build A, B, and C (and sometimes all the rest of the alphabet) just to have the right setup to maximise the success of X. It can grind, but focus on the benefits of X.

Which sounds like the position they've taken, thankfully.

(Where X represents "anything" and is specifically not the <whatever it's classified as> platform formally known as Twitter).

The melancholy will return, just ride it out each time. It gets easier, gradually.
by onecommentman | 2025-07-06 01:05:44+00:00
The first time this phenomenon showed up for Americans was “the Ugly American” phase of the late 1950s. The book “The Ugly American” was written in 1958, when America’s wealth and prestige was at its zenith as compared to Europe. American tourists to Europe had been perceived as loud and boorish for 100 years prior, as evidenced by travel writing of the period.

But the disparity between America and Europe had never been as lopsided as the late 1950s, in terms of wealth, social influence, military power and even moral weight, since many tens of thousands of young American lives were selflessly lost on European soil because of the moral failings of European governance. And so labeling Americans as “ugly” (couldn’t call them poor, weak, dumb, immoral, etc.) provided a particular release to Europeans and guilt-addled wealthy Americans alike.

I guess the US has reached that same degree of imbalance with most of the rest of the world in 2025 as we had in 1958, for this sort of article to be published in the WSJ. Americans are naturally loud, boorish and insular and always have been…part of our unique charm.

This cautionary article could have, and probably has, been written in various forms since the 1880s for American tourists crossing the pond by sail, steamship, and air.
by martinald | 2025-07-06 01:06:11+00:00
Not for all jobs though? There are many (imo) soul destroying 'translation' jobs at many private (and I suspect especially, public) sector companies. Think of things like typing up (scanned) paper submissions to your local government.

This will often be a giant excel spreadsheet or if you are lucky something like Microsoft Access.

They are absolutely riddled with mistakes as is with humans in the loop.

I think this is one of the core issues with HNers evaluating LLMs. I'm not entirely some of them have ever seen how ramshackle 90%+ of operations are.
by gosub100 | 2025-07-06 01:07:14+00:00
thats true, if there were one sigle "coder" who was cloistered away from the team and came back when s/he claimed the requirements were met and the task was complete. Whereas, in FDA (and presumably FAA/DoD) regulated designs, a massive team is following a rigid SDLC including code reviews for best practices.

Now, technically the FDA doesn't force that, all they specify is that some standard procedure must be followed, and written evidence must be produced upon demand showing that the procedure is followed. So you could contrive an example where a cowboy coder made his own sqrt() and completely broke it, and that somehow led to the death or injury to a patient, or an elevator going into free-fall. or a fuze detonating. sure. Is that likely to happen? absolutely not.
by alganet | 2025-07-06 01:07:28+00:00
Dude, I chose this example precisely because I know for a fact there is a lot of bullshit about it on the internet and LLMs cannot differentiate between a good source and a bad source.

This is honestly unbelievable. You're defending ancient aliens. What's next? Heavens Gate? Ashtar Sheran?

Even the LLMs themselves acknowledge that this is regarded as offensive. If you correct it, it will apologize (they just can't do it _before_ you correct them).

You're wrong.
by sandreas | 2025-07-06 01:07:52+00:00
The device I linked below (https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005006369887180.html) has a XEON, ECC, 2xNVMe, SATA, 2.5GBit and everything else you need in a very small box.

Intel also means it has QuickSync, so you won't need to buy a N150. However, I tend to be sceptic about these aliexpress-boxes, too. Reliable server manufacturers, like Dell, HP, Lenovo or Fujitsu (RIP) are way more reliable.
by jdp | 2025-07-06 01:08:07+00:00
The divergence between users and programmers became more pronounced over time. When command line interfaces were dominant they naturally made programmers out of users, even if they didn't realize it. CLIs made “using the computer” and “programming the computer” effectively the same activity in a lot of cases. A command someone entered to run a program was itself a program. Entering the previous command again and modifying it, for instance to pipe the output of the first program into another program, was also a program. Once the desired result was achieved, that final command could be saved and used again later. Or shared with someone to be used as-is, or to be tweaked a little bit for their own use case.

Each interaction with a CLI results in a valid program that can be saved, studied, shared, and remixed. That's a powerful model for the same reasons the spreadsheet model is powerful: it's immediate, not modal, and successful interactions can be saved as an artifact and resumed later. Can we do the same things for GUIs? What is the GUI equivalent of pressing the up arrow key in a shell, where I can recall my previous interaction with the system and then modify it? Can I generate artifacts as byproducts from my interactions with a GUI system that I can save for later and share with others?
by HappMacDonald | 2025-07-06 01:08:17+00:00
I won't badmouth your preference of one form of iteration over another, but I don't follow what you're trying to say about what functions do.

It's not clear if you mean "the functions that you write" or "the functions that other people (library providers? Colleagues? Juniors?) write.

The functions you write do what you tell them to do. If you don't tell them to recurse, then they don't. If you do tell them to recurse, then that has whatever frame optimization or boundedness guarantees that you bake into it (which is the same responsibilities you take on writing a loop just packaged in a slightly different form).

The functions black-boxed by a library aren't something you have a lot of control over, nor in most cases are those black boxed by colleagues. Your concerns sound as though they target these cases, though your preferences really have no traction here.
by dogmatism | 2025-07-06 01:08:25+00:00
If someone told you you were "five years from a heart attack" they lied

that's not how it works

in a stable person (ie, not actually having a heart attack) stents help symptoms (a little better than medicines, but even that is debatable -- see Orbita trial). Medicines and lifestyle changes prevent heart attacks -- see Courage and Ischemia trials

cath labs are in fact about keeping you from dying once you have a heart attack. The other stents for stable disease like you had are nice -- you feel better faster with fewer medicines that without, but not main thing

source: not going to appeal to authority. See trials mentioned above, or ACC guidelines on management of CAD
by StellarScience | 2025-07-06 01:08:34+00:00
We have a user interface design rule that keyboard shortcuts and context menus must only be "shortcuts" for commands that are discoverable via clear buttons or menus. That probably makes our apps old-fashioned.

I recall learning that the four corners of the screen are the most valuable screen real estate, because it's easy to move the mouse to those locations quickly without fine control. So it's user-hostile that for Windows 11 Microsoft moved the default "Start" menu location to the center. And I don't think they can ascribe it to being mobile-first. Maybe it's "touch-first", where mouse motion doesn't apply.
by quickthrowman | 2025-07-06 01:09:36+00:00
It’s usually homeowners buying and installing crappy electrical products off Amazon, or ‘handyman’ types who don’t have a license. I sell and run commercial electrical work at a union shop and we buy electrical material from supply houses, not Amazon.

You certainly could buy material off Amazon but if you’re passing the cost onto the customer, why not just buy the real thing?
by PaulHoule | 2025-07-06 01:10:11+00:00
At least as a shopper my feelings about Walmart are pretty mixed.

That time I needed a game camera immediately and AMZN said 5 days I got it at 7am the next day at Walmart. Most of the bread at the bakery is that awful stuff people accuse of being “ultra-processed food” but they have something like the Vollkornbrot you see in German Bäckerei that is 100% honest and delicious to my taste. The pharmacist there is a real eager beaver who never fails to tell me something I didn’t know about a medicine I take and that’s not easy. On the other hand I ride the bus with someone who used to work there who says it was a shit place to work.

Walmart didn’t have a representative sitting behind Trump at his inauguration and even if it’s evil it’s better to have two evil competitors than one evil monopoly.
by jcalvinowens | 2025-07-06 01:11:09+00:00
I've always felt like RPN is a really powerful lesson in how subtly redefining the semantics of a problem can make it suddenly much easier to solve.

My personal struggle with functional programming is how difficult I find it to be iterative. I've very frequently backed myself into a corner and ended up having to rewrite everything, whereas in C, even when I miss badly on the architecture, I'm still usually able to reuse some big chunks of what I've already done in the end. Maybe it's just inexperience.
by noahjk | 2025-07-06 01:11:29+00:00
The cycle will be complete. I am an over-user of hyphens where em dashes should be used, and my misuse worked out well to differentiate - but now I'm just another LLM, I guess. Well, I actually learned to appreciate en and em dashes after learning more about them since the proliferation of ems, so maybe I can finally switch to them without feeling judged for outsourcing my work?
by thechao | 2025-07-06 01:13:24+00:00
I'm tired of bailing Floridian and coastal Texans out after hurricanes. I'm in Austin (Texas) and our insurance bills are outrageous because of coastal cities (indirect, if nontrivial). If they want to live down there, fine, but I don't want to bail them out. Houston & Corpus are the worst offenders: they produce huge amounts of CO2 per capita, and then demand bailouts when climate change fucks them over.
by genocidicbunny | 2025-07-06 01:14:47+00:00
WinRAR also seems to handle opening a file in an external app without manually extracting much better. I can just double-click a file in an archive and open it in an external app, while with 7-zip it seems to immediately delete the temporary file so the external app ends up trying to open a non-existent file. Rather annoying if you're just trying to quickly check something like the readme.txt in an archive.
by const_cast | 2025-07-06 01:15:01+00:00
The practical difference is that physical buttons can be changed without looking, since they provide tactile feedback and they're physically present in the world. Touchscreens require looking, even if you're pretty familiar with the interface, because you can miss.

Of course even this is kind of moot, because a lot of car manufacturers put vital controls on the touchscreen. I mean, Teslas have the fucking gear shift on the touchscreen.
by Aurornis | 2025-07-06 01:15:14+00:00
> What on earth is wrong with not paying taxes legally?

The primary anger is at the tax code.

> If the government wants a tax to be paid they need to make it simple and unconditional.

That’s the point. Making people aware of how the tax code is structured and how people take advantage of it is key to building support to change the tax code to what the people want.
by kccqzy | 2025-07-06 01:16:13+00:00
They can still keep the 2001 aesthetic while giving themselves more work: we have higher resolution screens now so a 1024x1024 icon is probably in order; we have pervasive OS-level dark mode support now so they can create dark and light versions of the icon; as UI fashions change they can add or reduce the amount of shadow and glass effect.
by jterrys | 2025-07-06 01:16:53+00:00
UIs tend to have a universality with how people structure their environments. Minimalism is super hot outside of software design too. Millennial Gray is a cliche for a reason. Frutiger Aero wasn't just limited to technology. JLo's debut single is pretty cool about this aesthetic https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lYfkl-HXfuU
by HappMacDonald | 2025-07-06 01:17:20+00:00
```Haskell

-- | Flipped version of '<$>'.

infixl 1 <&>

(<&>) :: Functor f => f a -> (a -> b) -> f b

as <&> f = f <$> as

```

"infix", "Functor", and "as" are the only words in this code. Everything else is single letters (thanks math traditions..) and punctuation. What's a <&>? <$>? ::? We've got two different kinds of arrows, => and ->. -- is obviously enough a line comment. At least I know what = means.. give or take it's constant ambiguous meaning between languages of assignment and/or equality testing.

And this isn't even delving into the black arts of defining types, where the really ugly punctuation toolkits get opened.

I don't care whether or not they represent regular functions nor what their calling syntax is. What I care is that the base language has many many dozens of them to remember and then to parse in the wild, and then that authors are encouraged to continue proliferating more of them:

```Haskell

-- What does this 'mouse operator' mean? :thinking_suicide:

(~@@^>) :: Functor f => (a -> b) -> (a -> c -> d) -> (b -> f c) -> a -> f d

```

Credit: Kowainik's Haskell Style Guide https://kowainik.github.io/posts/2019-02-06-style-guide
by jkmcf | 2025-07-06 01:17:44+00:00
I'll bite.

1. There's too much money directly opposing the goals of fighting climate change

2. Humans aren't big on alignment. FFS, we still don't have good UX/GUI for Linux and it's mainly been stagnant* and divided into Gnome and KDE for 20+ years.

* despite the impressive accomplishments, it's essentially true
by breve | 2025-07-06 01:17:50+00:00
> Our emails, files, and browsing histories are all already at the company’s fingertips. Chrome is the most popular browser in the world; almost one-third of the planet’s emails are sent with Gmail; and Google’s productivity apps have billions of users who store files across Drive, Docs, Sheets, and Slides.

It's important to avoid compromising yourself like this. If you're the sysadmin for a company it's also important to take on the responsibility of not compromising your users.

You must respect your privacy. Google never will.
by julianlam | 2025-07-06 01:18:01+00:00
This also happened to me in a rental. We drove it off the lot to our hotel a half-hour away before we discovered the remote was busted, with all of our possessions locked inside.

I did know that there must be a physical key (unless Tesla?), and the only way I found the keyhole was because a previous renter had scratched the doorknob to shit trying to access the very same keyhole.
by const_cast | 2025-07-06 01:18:37+00:00
> This administration is the best argument for DEI I’ve ever seen in my life

Right, they've essentially implemented reverse DEI: always hire the agreeable white man, no matter what. Which was essentially the status-quo in the fucking 60s.

Now we have a bunch of old white men who can drink more than they can read running our government into the ground. They're all very horribly unqualified. But, they are essentially breathing doormats, which I think is vital to an authoritarian regime.
by adyashakti | 2025-07-06 01:19:01+00:00
we suffer because we construct an ego, superimposing fabricated values over simple experience. in Buddhist terms, this is called reflexivity: we automatically assign a value—desirable, undesirable, or neutral—to each experience provided by the senses and mind. but these values are imagined, arbitrary artificial constructions, not part of reality. Vedānta terms it adhyāya, superimposition. in that view, the individual self is due to the real Self, Brahman, being covered by an upādhi (limiting adjunct) of ahaṅkāra (false ego). so only the false ego appears to suffer.
by ChiMan | 2025-07-06 01:19:04+00:00
The speed alone is sufficient for a local-first approach. The latency of any cloud software I’ve ever used is like constant sand in the gears of thinking. Although taking supplements that slow my thinking—essentially natural downers—do improve my experience with such software, the improved experience comes at the expense of IQ. Basically, you need to be a little slow and dumb for the software to work as intended.

This is nuts. Computers are supposed to enhance and enable thinking, not make you stupid. In this sense, cloud software is possibly the biggest fraud ever perpetrated on the paying, computer-using public.

For the love of God, please bring back my late 1990s and early 2000s brain-boosting computer experience.
by throw0101d | 2025-07-06 01:19:30+00:00
> The disk is going to report an uncorrected error for one of them.

Emperical evidence has shown otherwise: I have regularly gotten checksum error reports that ZFS has complained about during a scrub.

The ZFS developers have said in interviews that disks, when asked from LBA 123 have returned the contents of LBA 234 (due to disk firmware bugs): the on-disk checksum for 234 is correct, and so the bits were passed up the stack, but that's not the data that the kernel/ZFS asked for. It is only be verifying at the file system layer than the problem was caught (because at the disk layer things were "fine").

A famous paper that used Google's large quantity of drives as a 'sample population' mentions file system-level checks:

* https://www.cs.toronto.edu/~bianca/papers/fast08.pdf

See also the Google File System paper (§5.2 Data Integrity):

* https://research.google/pubs/the-google-file-system/

Trusting drives is not wise.
by godelski | 2025-07-06 01:19:32+00:00
Have you ever had a cat?

I ask because people are often surprised at how social cats are. Sure, some are extroverts and just love everyone like any golden retriever would. But most cats will want to be in the same room if you even if they aren't cuddly (all the time). They greet you at the door and like to play with you. They're just introverted and need time to warm up
by mitthrowaway2 | 2025-07-06 01:19:41+00:00
So for another example, I wanted to get a stainless steel pasta strainer. I checked four different kitchen/cooking stores and the ones that had them them only had ones that were too deep, and they were all priced as ridiculously luxurious items, over $90. Then I checked a local hardware store and they had exactly what I wanted and it was only $12. I only thought of that place because I passed it on the way home and was desperate.