MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by runarberg | 2025-07-03 16:33:23+00:00
> There is no Judaic Daesh, for example, and none of the well-documented atrocities of the IDF come close.

Ideologically there is an argument to be had that the most extreme versions of Zionism (e.g. Kahanism) is just as bad as the fundamentalist (and racist) ideology of ISIS. Behaviorally the IDF is far worse then ISIS ever had a chance to be. The total number of atrocities, the impunity of their actions, the systematic nature of them, the backing of the entire state apparatus behind those atrocities, the number of victims, and the concentrated location of those victims makes the IDF far far worse.

Of course it is very silly to compare atrocities, one should try not to do that, as one set of victims deserve justice just as equally as any other set of victims.
by WorldMaker | 2025-07-03 16:33:35+00:00
In terms of developer ergonomics, try/catch seems among the best we've come up with so far. We want to focus on the success case and leave the error case as a footnote.

That's the simplicity argument here too: sometimes we only want to write the success case, and are happy with platform defaults for error reporting. (Another thing that PHP handled out-of-the-box because its domain was so constrained; it had started with strong default HTML output for error conditions that's fairly readable and useful for debugging. It's also useful for disclosure leaks which is why the defaults and security best practices have shifted so much from the early days of PHP when even php_info() was by default turned on and easy to run to debug some random cgi-bin server you were assigned by the hosting company that week.)

Most of the problems with try/catch aren't even really problems with that form of error handling, but with the types of the errors themselves. In C++/Java/C#/others, when an error happens we want stack traces for debugging and stack walks are expensive and may require pulling symbols data from somewhere else and that can be expensive. But that's not actually inherent to the try/catch pattern. You can throw cheaper error types. (JS you don't have to throw the nice Error family that does stack traces, you could throw a cheap string, for instance. Python has some stack walking tricks that keep its Exceptions somewhat cheaper and a lot lazier, because Python expects try/except to be a common flow control idiom.)

We also know from Haskell do-notation and now async/await in so many languages (and some of Rust's syntax sugar, etc) that you can have the try/catch syntax sugar but still power it with Result/Either monads. You can have that cake and eat it, too. In JS, a Promise is a future Either<ResolvedType, RejectedType> but in an async/await function you are writing your interactions with it as "normal JS" try/catch. Both can and do coexist in the same language together, it's not really a "battle" between the two styles, the simple conceptual model of try/catch "footnotes" and the robust type system affordances of a Result/Either monad type.

(If there is a war, it's with Go doing a worst of both worlds and not using a true flat-mappable Monad for its return type. But then that would make try/catch easy syntax sugar to build on top of it, and that seems to be the big thing they don't want, for reasons that seem as much obstinance as anything to me.)
by daxfohl | 2025-07-03 16:33:40+00:00
Interesting, I'm the opposite! I far prefer to start off with a bit of code to help explore gotchas I might not have thought about and to help solidify my thoughts and approach. It doesn't have to be complete, or even compile. Just enough to identify the tradeoffs of whatever I'm doing.

Once I have that, it's usually far easier to flesh out the details in the detailed design doc, or go back to the Product team and discuss conflicting or vague requirements, or opportunities for tweaks that could lead to more flexibility or whatever else. Then from there it's usually easier to get the rest of the team on the same page, as I feel I'll understand more concretely the tradeoffs that were made in the design and why.

(Not saying one approach is better than the other. I just find the difference interesting).
by smaudet | 2025-07-03 16:34:03+00:00
I have a suspicion managers will become redundant sooner than tech workers, although certain big CEOs love to try to say otherwise... (wonder why...).

An (good) AI manager is far more efficient than any human manager, and doesn't need to resort to this tiered system. In theory, they are far faster any any human manager too, meaning the company can scale around them without any issue.

Maybe you still have a board that reviews decisions at a high level, and an office of human manager cogs that can review the individual AI decisions, but then your company structure can become such that a corp of 1k+ individuals can _directly communicate with their customer(s)_

Now, of course I'm not going to pretend that this won't come with its own share of issues, but that's what the "manager cogs" are for...
by jonathan-adly | 2025-07-03 16:34:08+00:00
One of the most pleasant experiences I had writing code, is early AI days when we did hyperscript SSE. Super locality of behavior, super interesting way of writing Server Sent Events code.

eventsource demo from http://server/demo

on message as string put it into #div end on open log "connection opened." end on close log "connection closed." end on error log "handle error here..." end

end https://hyperscript.org/features/event-source/
by rietta | 2025-07-03 16:34:34+00:00
Indeed. Regular interaction in the region at minimum went from well from modern day Lebanon and down through Ethiopia (Kush). In the biblical timeline Moses had a Kushite wife. I have read a compelling account that links biblical Moses with a possible identification as Senenmut during the New Kingdom Period and connected with Hatshepsut (possibly Pharoh's Daughter). Following this period we know there was regular political and military correspondence from all over the region, such as the Amarna letters which are on display at the British Museum. The point I make, as a lay person who has read the biblical narratives and other sources, is Egypt was extremely well connected for an extremely long period of time and significant DNA mixing the entire time is to be expected and I doubt tells us too much about origin migrations.
by azath92 | 2025-07-03 16:34:49+00:00
I genuinely find that interesting to hear. what about the 30 examples felt different to say the frontpage? (assuming it did)

On a meta level i was suuuuper conscious of writing every word of this post/comments myself, as my prior is that HN's community is very intollerant of and highly sensitive to low effort content, whether via AI or not. This is despite using AI tools for lots of other parts of work (drafting, coding, summarising, brainstorming etc).

Do you think HN has become more accepting of AI slop, the slop is becoming harder to detect, or isnt as discerning as i assume?
by throw0101d | 2025-07-03 16:34:53+00:00
> Faster only because the distances involved are short enough that the PHY layer adds significant overhead.

This specifically mentions the 7130 model, which is a specialized bit of kit, and which Arista advertises for (amongst other things):

> Arista's 7130 applications simplify and transform network infrastructure, and are targeted for use cases including ultra-low latency exchange trading, accurate and lossless network visibility, and providing vendor or broker based shared services. They enable a complete lifecycle of packet replication, multiplexing, filtering, timestamping, aggregation and capture.

* https://www.arista.com/en/products/7130-applications

It is advertised as a "Layer 1" device and has a user-programmable FPGA. Some pre-built applications are: "MetaWatch: Market data & packet capture, Regulatory compliance (MiFID II - RTS 25)", "MetaMux: Market data fan-out and data aggregation for order entry at nanosecond levels", "MultiAccess: Supporting Colo deployments with multiple concurrent exchange connection", "ExchangeApp: Increase exchange fairness, Maintain trade order based on edge timestamps".

Latency matters (and may even be regulated) in some of these use cases.
by metalman | 2025-07-03 16:35:50+00:00
Vitamin C/ascorbic acid/swimming pool cleener is interesting stuff, but it is not generaly benificient as a suppliment for healthy people. I will(very) occasionaly chew up a gram, or throw a spoon full into a summer drink concoction, but I also know someone who got a tounge blister from copying me chewing up a vitC pill, someone I knew well, who had such different respinses to things that we started to experiment lightly,they also had a variant form of collegen in all of there conective tissue, which made them vastly more flexible than most people......which(oddly)relates to the titles subject matter
by mvieira38 | 2025-07-03 16:35:51+00:00
“ChatGPT is built to sense our vulnerability and to tap into that to keep us engaged with it.” says this Sherry Turkle person from MIT.

This seems to be a fundamental misunderstanding of the business model in place, or am I incorrect? OpenAI has nothing to gain by boosting engagement or anything like that, it's actually kind of bad for their business if people are constantly prompting the models for spiritual awakenings, as these aren't exactly the kind of experts that would buy Pro or anything
by altruios | 2025-07-03 16:35:52+00:00
> The rules do not say that passed items retain their velocity when passed from creature to creature. The object would have the same velocity on the final "pass" as it did on the first one.

Since this wooden rod travels several miles in a 6 second time frame - traveling more than 500M/s on average - don't we have to assume it accumulates?

Falling damage is the mechanism that makes the most sense to shoehorn in there. Using an improvised weapon on a rod already traveling more than 500M/s seems even more clumsy, as well as calculating the damage more wibbly-wobbly.

There's also the rule of cool. If it makes the story better/ more enjoyable: have at it.
by kmrankit | 2025-07-03 16:36:03+00:00
Remote: Yes (any timezone)

Technologies: (comfortable in switch multiple techstacks)TypeScript, C++, Go, Rust, Python, C, Java, Bash, React.js, Next.js, Sveltekit, Express.js, Gin, FastAPI, PostgreSQL, MongoDB, Redis, SQLite, Prisma, Drizzle, Linux, Docker, Git, AWS, CI/CD, CMake, Ninja

Portfolio: https://kmrankit.vercel.app

Resume: https://kmrankit.vercel.app/webresume.pdf

Email: sahuankit.murhu@gmail.com
by JumpCrisscross | 2025-07-03 16:36:13+00:00
> a counter-terrorism operation against "Unpatriotic terrorists"?

Yes. The traditional framing is riot or rebellion suppression.

> can achieve that more effectively with a general strike

This is civil action. If protests and strikes work, the point is moot. Where weapons and training have historically made a difference is when the army is sent in to quell a strike.
by slightwinder | 2025-07-03 16:36:20+00:00
We hadn't the means to discover them for most of the last millennia, so now being good enough is obvious. But the question is why now, and not 10 or 20 years ago. It might be that we had the ability for a longer time already, but it just never "clicked" until now to recognize them. It is also possible that we really just got good enough recently. Or even that until now, there really were none in the last decade we could find, and we are just lucky(?) that now more are coming our way.

We might know this better in the next years, depending on whether there will now be an explosion of dozen and dozens of new interstellar objects discovered, or not. It might be another rush, like with exoplanets and local dwarf-planets.
by tough | 2025-07-03 16:36:52+00:00
As a non-founder / not a VC you max get a few percentage points, and its mostly paper toilet money until there's an exit or IPO, and the founders will always try to squeeze you if they can, not because they're bad people, but because the system incentivises it. (you'll keep getting diluted in future rounds)

tbh, if im gonna bust my ass I'd rather own the thing.
by kmrankit | 2025-07-03 16:36:52+00:00
Location: India

Remote: Yes

Willing to relocate: Yes

Technologies: (comfortable in switch multiple techstacks)TypeScript, C++, Go, Rust, Python, C, Java, Bash, React.js, Next.js, Sveltekit, Express.js, Gin, FastAPI, PostgreSQL, MongoDB, Redis, SQLite, Prisma, Drizzle, Linux, Docker, Git, AWS, CI/CD, CMake, Ninja

Portfolio: https://kmrankit.vercel.app

Resume: https://kmrankit.vercel.app/webresume.pdf

Email: sahuankit.murhu@gmail.com
by pamelafox | 2025-07-03 16:36:53+00:00
Regarding the Playwright example: I had the same experience this week attempting to build an agent first by using the Playwright MCP server, realizing it was slow, token-inefficient, and flaky, and rewriting with direct Playwright calls.

MCP servers might be fun to get an idea for what's possible, and good for one-off mashups, but API calls are generally more efficient and stable, when you know what you want.

Here's the agent I ended up writing: https://github.com/pamelafox/personal-linkedin-agent

Demo: https://www.youtube.com/live/ue8D7Hi4nGs
by singpolyma3 | 2025-07-03 16:37:11+00:00
Sounds like several fundamental workflow issues that the LLM is perhaps exacerbating but need to be fixed either way.

One, they need to run their code. Make sure it works before submitting a PR. If someone submits code to me that does not work I don't care if it came from an LLM or not, go run your code and come back when it works. If they routinely refuse to run their code and never learn their lesson then I might suggest they find another profession... Or require they submit a video of the code working.

Second, going away and coming back with a totally different PR I give the feedback of "what happened to the code we were working on before? We didn't need all new code." As the senior my time is worth (a bit) more than the intern's so I don't hesitate to make their bad choices their problem. Come back when you've made a serious attempt and then we can discuss it.
by rtkwe | 2025-07-03 16:37:16+00:00
No no no the last peasant gets to make an Improvised Weapon attack at least! d20 + Dex to hit and 1d4 on hit. Thrown it has a normal range of 20 feet and a long range of 60 feet.

You're right though that it's just a mishmash of inapplicable rules (it's not a falling object) and mixing real and game world physics only to the players advantage (peasants are able to pass it any distance in 6 seconds but you turn on real world physics when it comes time to apply damage). That's why my general rule is we're either working all in one world or all in the other when trying to figure out what happens in weird situations.
by zem | 2025-07-03 16:37:22+00:00
> Sure, exceptions won't work if you're avoiding the GC (which doesn't have anything to do with C), but so what. It's not like C programmers are currently using exceptions.

that works if your main use case for d is as a top-level wrapper program that is basically calling a bunch of c libraries. if you want to use d libraries you will run into ones that need the gc pretty quickly.
by mixedmath | 2025-07-03 16:37:22+00:00
From the title, I had thought that this would be a new tool for searching science, such as searching the arxiv. But this is actually a survey.

I quote the conclusion of the survey:

---

In conclusion, rapid advancements in artificial intelligence, particularly large language models like OpenAI-o1 and DeepSeek-R1, have demonstrated substantial potential in areas such as logical reasoning and experimental coding. These developments have sparked increasing interest in applying AI to scientific research. However, despite the growing potential of AI in this domain, there is a lack of comprehensive surveys that consolidate current knowledge, hindering further progress. This paper addresses this gap by providing a detailed survey and unified framework for AI4Research. Our contributions include a systematic taxonomy for classifying AI4Research tasks, identification of key research gaps and future directions, and a compilation of open-source resources to support the community. We believe this work will enhance our understanding of AI’s role in research and serve as a catalyst for future advancements in the field.

---

I jumped at this because I'm a mathematician who has been complaining about the lack of effective mathematical search for several years.
by HelloMcFly | 2025-07-03 16:37:37+00:00
Is it really controversial to say that most environmentalists want to protect ecosystems, not destroy capitalism? No, it's not controversial, it's just wrong. Must protecting ecosystems mean a hatred for capitalism? No.

You’re taking effects (slower pipelines, fewer logging permits) and making those effects the activists’ "true" goal. In reality, many of the people campaigning for stronger environmental safeguards are business-friendly too, such as 1000s of economists (and many Nobel laureates) have backed a carbon tax because it uses market forces to cut emissions.

Calling for long-term accounting of environmental costs isn’t anti-capitalist.
by alganet | 2025-07-03 16:37:44+00:00
I think the web platform is really simple, easy to understand and great.

A. Your content is a document. A semantic HTML document, boring, mostly made of text.

B. You can make the document alter parts of itself with JS. You don't mess with appearance here, just change the boring document content.

C. You can make the document look good by applying some styles to semantic HTML tags.

If you respect them, you get both LoB and SoC neatly arranged into meaningful layers.

--

Tailwind-like stuff breaks semantic HTML. Classes like ".flex-7" are about style, not the text. CSS classes should be stuff like ".introduction" or ".cooking-ingredients".

It makes documents otherwise simple to read into a mess. Now there's appearance concerns hidden in between the content. It's bad.

--

All good rules come with great exceptions. In this case, stuff like Google Maps. You can't really represent it as a document. But that's rare on the web.

Somehow, people were convinced to use those "frameworks for rare use cases" to make simple documents, forms, etc.

--

Local <style> tags fall into this category of exceptions. Sometimes you need some extra style for a content that is unusual, but that's the exception. Most websites want to look consistent across all their published content.
by rietta | 2025-07-03 16:37:58+00:00
I suppose we do not know what she looked like, but Moses had a Kushite wife and was criticized for it. "Miriam and Aaron spoke against Moses because of the Cushite woman whom he had married, for he had married a Cushite woman." (Numbers 12:1 ESV)

It seems that no evidence is a bit of hyperbole.
by schiffern | 2025-07-03 16:37:59+00:00
>What makes water mass cheaper to orbit compared to nitrogen mass?

Nitrogen needs a high-pressure bottle which is wasted mass, whereas water you can send to orbit in thin plastic and fabric bags like they do on ISS.

Often on ISS they're actually shipping oxygen as water, but still the wasted mass of water being 11% hydrogen plus the wasted mass of the bag is more efficient than a high pressure gas cylinder.
by tstrimple | 2025-07-03 16:38:04+00:00
I think the issue it that you're speaking to an ideal that doesn't tend to stand up in reality. The reality is if people stop seeing your face in meetings people are less likely to think about you. This may feel good to the stereotypical introvert who just wants to get things done and be left alone. But it can be a career killer. This is very apparent in hybrid companies where folks in the office with incidental face time have an easier time advancing than remote employees regardless of value added. We can state that it's not fair and things should be different and more inclusive but that doesn't do anything to actually make environments more inclusive.
by antonvs | 2025-07-03 16:38:43+00:00
I use byobu which is basically an opinionated distribution of tmux. Scroll wheel works fine, as does Alt-PgUp/PgDn.

Ctrl-Tab probably won't work because terminals tend not to recognize it as different from Tab. But you might be able to bind Alt-Tab or some other such combo to cycle through panes in the tmux config. It should just be a one-liner.
by hellojesus | 2025-07-03 16:38:45+00:00
My anecdote was used to show how the policy introduces moral hazard and deadweight loss. I would equally oppose it, as I do things like government mandated smoke-free restaurants, even if they benefitted me. I would moreso prefer that smoke-free restaurants exist because the market dictates it wants them by not transacting with smoke-partitioned restaurants.

> everything from the roads, breathable air, a widespread and capable workforce, a dynamic labor market, powerful financial markets, a justice system, fire departments, and lots of consumer protections so we can focus on growth instead of spending all our time trying to research if your bank is actually a scam or if the restaurant down the street washes their hands enough.

There is certainly some gain in being able to outsource research, but it is difficult to determine if it is a net good for society or the individual due to the moral hazard it generates. Not worrying about your bank being a scam allows actual banks to take on outsized risk and then not face any repercussions. It skews the appetite for risk that disproportionately benefits risk takers. For a recent example, see the Silicon Valley Bank failure, which the FEDs totally bailed out to prevent a collapse across many more banks, mostly because those banks overleant at low mortgage rates and couldn't sell the low interest notes at face value after the rise in interest rates, leading to a liquidity crisis.

Focusing on growth comes at a cost; lots of inefficies are introduced. Instead, we could focus on being efficient and low waste and allow the growth to come naturally.
by themaninthedark | 2025-07-03 16:38:51+00:00
No, still very ongoing.

https://www.economist.com/china/2024/05/30/the-evolution-of-...

https://www.dol.gov/agencies/ilab/against-their-will-the-sit...

https://www.politico.eu/article/forced-labor-still-haunts-ch...

https://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/stories/2025-05-29/chi...
by Someone | 2025-07-03 16:39:02+00:00
> For example, one of von Braun’s designs called for a massive 75 metre diameter wheel

That’s a radius of about 5% of the length of a human body, so I guess we would soon find out how humans react to living in an environment where ‘gravity’ at eye height is about 5% lower than at toe height or do we already know something about that?
by loudmax | 2025-07-03 16:39:47+00:00
LLMs are really good at processing vague descriptions of problems and offering a solution that's reasonably close to the mark. They can be a great guide for unfamiliar tools.

For example, I have a pretty good grasp of regular expressions because I'm an old Perl programmer, but I find processing json using `jq` utterly baffling. LLMs are great at coming up with useful examples, and sometimes they'll even get it perfect the first time. I've learned more about properly using `jq` with the help of LLMs than I ever did on my own. Same goes for `ffmpeg`.

LLMs are not a substitute for learning. When used properly, they're an enhancement to learning.

Likewise, never mind the idiot CEOs of failing companies looking forward to laying off half their workforce and replacing them with AI. When properly used, AI is a tool to help people become more productive, not replace human understanding.