MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by Ekaros | 2025-07-19 10:03:16+00:00
You might start with something simple with aim for simplicity. Then you need to add more features. Eventually in enough years you will have lost the simplicity as you have that many features to support.

You might not add features, but well that is most likely losing proposition against those competitors that have features. As generally normal users want some tiny subset of features. Be it images, tables, internal links, comments, versions.
by mrkramer | 2025-07-19 10:03:16+00:00
>This is why I gave up on credit card processing for my startup casino in 2010 and just went to taking Bitcoin and other crypto.

And how many customers you lost in 2010 because of that? Probably more than 90%. Even now people are reluctant to use crypto but tbh crypto crowd is so big that you can perhaps succeed in opening crypto only business.
by ajsnigrutin | 2025-07-19 10:03:32+00:00
TSA: "Sir, are you wearing the terrorist watch?"

You: "no no, it's a modified terrorist watch, it now has more features!"

https://www.spiegel.de/international/world/al-qaida-s-watch-...

https://www.watchesofespionage.com/blogs/woe-dispatch/casio-...
by wasmperson | 2025-07-19 10:04:21+00:00
> The main benefit of having async (or Go-style M:N scheduling) is that you can afford to launch as many tasks/fibers/goroutines/... as you want

Some have argued that the real solution to this problem is to "just" fix OS threads. Rumor has it Google has done exactly this, but keeps it close to their chest:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXuZi9aeGTw

https://lwn.net/Articles/879398/

Somewhat related and also by Google is WebAssembly Promise Integration, which converts blocking code into non-blocking code without requiring language support:

https://v8.dev/blog/jspi

I see a possible future where the "async/await" idea simply fades away outside of niche use-cases.
by FerkiHN | 2025-07-19 10:07:12+00:00
Great project, I love all these things,I also gave your repository a star, I hope you will have 1000 of them someday, you really add to the capabilities of the terminal, I'm also interested in this, if you want, check out my project too:

https://github.com/Ferki-git-creator/phono-in-terminal-image...

I don't want to seem greedy, but if you want, you can also star the repository, so that all our terminal projects can see the world!
by CamouflagedKiwi | 2025-07-19 10:07:15+00:00
I can very much sympathise with the point here, at a previous company we used to use .deb packages for adding things to user's machines, and the Debian packaging tools were completely impenetrable for anyone not deeply immersed in the Debian way of doing things. We ended up with fpm to build packages because it just did what it was told. I would have liked something that didn't drag Ruby along with it, but never got to doing anything about that.

I suspect that debcraft still has far more Debian opinions than I would have wanted though. Mentions of sources, source packages and autopkgtests are the kinds of things I didn't want, I just wanted a package that put files on a system at locations I could specify. At that point containers are not needed either because you're just producing a file, not running a bunch of highly Debian specific commands.
by noduerme | 2025-07-19 10:07:29+00:00
Yeah, the environmental impact of jackasses mining jackass coin, or jackasses training LLMs is not insignificant. Are you seriously telling me now that if my website is 256k or 1024k I'm responsible for destroying the planet? Take it out on your masters.

And no, reducing resource use to the minimum in the name of sustainability does not scale down the same way it scales up. You're just pushing the idea that all human activity is some sort of disease that's best disposed of. That's essentially just wishing the worst on your own species for being successful.

It's never clear to me whether people who push this line are doing so because they're bitter and want to punish other humans, or because they hate themselves. Either way, it evinces a system of thought that has already relegated humankind to the dustbin of history. If, in the long run, that's what happens, you're right and everyone else is wrong. Congratulations. It will make little difference in that case to you if the rest of us move on for a few hundred years to colonize the planets and revive the biosphere. Comfort yourself with the knowledge that this will all end in 10 or 20 thousand years, and the world will go back to being a hot hive of insects and reptiles. But what glory we wrought in our time.
by WhyNotHugo | 2025-07-19 10:07:59+00:00
> Is there some regulation that requires them to?

There isn’t. Even worse, there’s no legislation prohibited them from doing so.

Payment processors (eg: Mastercard, Visa) are the ultimate deciders of whether you can sell something online or not, regardless of whether it is legal.

They haven’t just blocked adult content, they’ve also blocked non-profits with which they disagree in the past.

We need much stronger legislation around this. Private entities shouldn’t be capable of deciding that a given organisation can’t charge online. Only institutions which represent the public’s interests should have this level of influence.
by user5534762135 | 2025-07-19 10:08:20+00:00
States using courtrooms to punish people who have attempted a coup is hardly unethical, no?

I have to say, it is cute to read your faux outrage over this after Bolsonaro made sure the guy with the best chances to defeat him two elections back would be put into prison in a sham trial right before the election... not persecuting a figure as corrupt and power hungry as Bolsonaro would be 100% ethically wrong.
by delta_p_delta_x | 2025-07-19 10:09:43+00:00
> Every time someone ships successful code that's hard to port to Windows

Until your boss tells you to port your so-far Linux-only code to Windows, and you run that struggle.

Signed, someone who spent the past year or so porting Linux code to Windows and macOS because the business direction changed and the company saw what was the money-maker.

P.S. Not the parent commenter, because I just realised they, too, had a paragraph beginning with 'signed, ...'
by Roark66 | 2025-07-19 10:10:03+00:00
So did Bolsonaro have any basis for claiming the vote against him was rigged? If he did, fair enough. There should be an investigation into the rigging.

If the vote was fair, then there may be an excuse of bad advice. He should've known better, but it's possible someone lied to him.

And a third option, he lied knowing well that the vote was fair. I such case this is an attempt to undermine the state and it should be dealt with harshly. It's o E thing if some journalist makes BS claims. It's another if obe if candidates does so.

I genuinely have no idea which of these is true. I know for a fact the claim "we lost because of fraud" has been popularised by Trump and him basically not getting even a slap on the wrist for it. So it gets used everywhere now.
by alpaca128 | 2025-07-19 10:10:30+00:00
> But most users don't care about fairness. They care about better software.

Users care about convenience and familiarity, then perhaps (perceived) functionality. People who care more about quality are a niche, not only in the software industry. Prioritizing quality means higher cost in some way, even if it's just effort to research the best choice.

> Most people will use a proprietary project if it's better.

Most people don't even compare available choices. Usually they don't choose based on license, but based on popularity or familiarity, based on what's the standard in the industry or within their community. If a user's been running a tool for years and it's good enough for their purposes they have no reason to look for an alternative, and the license or whether it's "better" is irrelevant. And big tech platforms love to amplify this effect with dark patterns and various forms of lock-in.
by sparkie | 2025-07-19 10:10:33+00:00
Also depends what we're trying to optimize. If we're trying to optimize for space then using a constant is a bad idea: Consider if we have 2Gi elements in the array: We have to grow it to 3Gi, but we may only need to add a few additional elements. That's pretty much a whole Gi of wasted space.

Clearly we don't just want a blanket constant, but the growth factor should be a function of the current length - decreasing as the size of the array grows.

For space optimization an ideal growth factor is 1+1/√(length). In the above example, where we have 2 Gi array, we would grow it only by 64ki elements. Obviously this results in many more allocations, and would only use this technique where we're optimizing for space rather than time.

We don't want to be messing around with square roots, and ideally, we want arrays to always be a multiple of some power of 2, so the trick is to approximate the square root:

inline int64_t approx_sqrt(int64_t length) { return 1 << (64 - __builtin_clzll(length)) / 2; // if C23, use stdc_first_leading_one_ull() from <stdbit.h> } inline int64_t new_length(int64_t length) { if (length == 0) return 1; return length + approx_sqrt(length); }

Some examples - for all powers of 2 between UINT16_MAX and UINT32_MAX, the old and new lengths:

old length: 2^16 -> new length: 0x00010100 (growth: 2^8) old length: 2^17 -> new length: 0x00020200 (growth: 2^9) old length: 2^18 -> new length: 0x00040200 (growth: 2^9) old length: 2^19 -> new length: 0x00080400 (growth: 2^10) old length: 2^20 -> new length: 0x00100400 (growth: 2^10) old length: 2^21 -> new length: 0x00200800 (growth: 2^11) old length: 2^22 -> new length: 0x00400800 (growth: 2^11) old length: 2^23 -> new length: 0x00801000 (growth: 2^12) old length: 2^24 -> new length: 0x01001000 (growth: 2^12) old length: 2^25 -> new length: 0x02002000 (growth: 2^13) old length: 2^26 -> new length: 0x04002000 (growth: 2^13) old length: 2^27 -> new length: 0x08004000 (growth: 2^14) old length: 2^28 -> new length: 0x10004000 (growth: 2^14) old length: 2^29 -> new length: 0x20008000 (growth: 2^15) old length: 2^30 -> new length: 0x40008000 (growth: 2^15) old length: 2^31 -> new length: 0x80010000 (growth: 2^16)

This is the growth rate used in Resizeable Arrays in Optimal Time and Space[1], but they don't use a single array with reallocation - instead they have an array of arrays, where growing the array appends an element to an index block which points to a data block of `approx_sqrt(length)` size, and the existing data blocks are all reused. The index block may require reallocation.

[1]:https://cs.uwaterloo.ca/research/tr/1999/09/CS-99-09.pdf
by susam | 2025-07-19 10:11:04+00:00
I just checked my home page [1] and it has a compressed transfer size of 7.0 kB.

/ 2.7 kB main.css 2.5 kB favicon.png 1.8 kB ------------------- Total 7.0 kB

Not bad, I think! I generate the blog listing on the home page (as well as the rest of my website) with my own static site generator, written in Common Lisp [2]. On a limited number of mathematical posts [3], I use KaTeX with client-side rendering. On such pages, KaTeX adds a whopping 347.5 kB!

katex.min.css 23.6 kB katex.min.js 277.0 kB auto-render.min.js 3.7 kB KaTeX_Main-Regular.woff2 26.5 kB KaTeX_Main-Italic.woff2 16.7 kB ---------------------------------- Total Additional 347.5 kB

Perhaps I should consider KaTeX server-side rendering someday! This has been a little passion project of mine since my university dorm room days. All of the HTML content, the common HTML template (for a consistent layout across pages), and the CSS are entirely handwritten. Also, I tend to be conservative about what I include on each page, which helps keep them small.

[1] https://susam.net/

[2] https://github.com/susam/susam.net/blob/main/site.lisp

[3] https://susam.net/tag/mathematics.html
by kldg | 2025-07-19 10:11:22+00:00
As a user, I'd make that argument for sure. The casual user simply wants the least friction, Microsoft doesn't care, and the FOSS developer space just has to live in this environment. As part of a broader argument to develop for and use FOSS, there's maybe something worth thinking about here, but Microsoft's not going to change its ways on this even if a dozen of us complain.

I was annoyed about the Chrome/FF thing recently (well, annoyed by Chrome, and annoyed as a casual user by Firefox's relative inabilities), so thought about what it'd take to make a new web browser. It's FAR too complicated; there is way too much to implement. HTML/JS/CSS are excessively complex, made for use cases ~nobody will run into, and you pretty much are required to implement everything Chrome does for compatibility. It's crazy Firefox even exists.

I decided instead, as an exercise, to implement an entirely new Internet built on CrypticWeb running the Mystic Beaver Protocol (MBP); surely you've heard of these, they are very big in my household. It's very simple; instead of forking the Internet to add even more garbage, we start from scratch. Instead of JS, we use waterwheel (.ww) files which patch the python script running on the stateful lodge server. I even ported the server to Micropython and can run it on a tiny ESP32C6 that fits on my pinky. The client's written in Python and interprets the simple JSON payloads the server sends over, to render it and interact with the server as needed.

It all works fine, but people are locked into this overcomplicated Bad/Legacy/Corporate/Devil Internet. big smh; wake up, sheeple!
by corimaith | 2025-07-19 10:11:25+00:00
Retail Banking =/= Finance. You cannot easily standardize let alone automate a corporate merger or raise capital from various sources due to unique individual characteristics of each company, that's why investment banks exist.

The Retail Bank's main function isn't providing cash either, it's keeping deposits which they loan out for profits. Whether you use cards or cash won't affect those margins.
by Ciantic | 2025-07-19 10:11:44+00:00
I use Bun for many package.json projects, but for shell scripting specifically, I find that Deno is a better choice because you can use dependencies with just import statements via NPM or JSR.

#!/usr/bin/env -S deno run import { z } from "npm:zod"; import { Webview } from "jsr:@webview/webview";
by mrkramer | 2025-07-19 10:12:50+00:00
>Write a Steam knockoff platform that's trustworthy enough for people to download, and load it up with dirty games. Put the premium on the customers if they want to use credit card transactions, otherwise push them towards crypto payments.

Easier said than done. It is hard to earn trust....you would probably need to jumpstart the platform with quite a few indie devs so people start trusting the site and using it.
by hiAndrewQuinn | 2025-07-19 10:12:52+00:00
Now go to an average McDonalds, with hundreds of orders, automatically added value meals, customer rewards, etc. consuming thousands of cows and a lot of pastureland.

Then multiply that by the number of daily customers.

Without web pages (information in general), we return to the Dark Ages. Reducing the number of hamburgers people eat doesn't really hurt anyone.
by tuatoru | 2025-07-19 10:13:42+00:00
Front-end software dev, call centers, HR, administration like health insurance and eventually some government bureaucracy, law, education, marketing, mass-market entertainment, banking and other financial services, business consulting, financial advice and accounting services, journalism, and probably other smaller employers.

Potentially all of those, and more, become smaller employers in relative terms.

A better nail-making machine is a single-purpose technology. It's not going to affect productivity much in unrelated industries such as healthcare, for example.

AI is a general-purpose technology like electric light or electric motors. It has the potential to improve productivity in a great many productive activities.

As another person said here, even if progress in AI stopped now, we have twenty years' sustained productivity growth ahead of us in adapting processes to use AI more effectively across the whole economy.

Whether the economy as a whole grows or shrinks depends mainly on whether households will buy more entertainment, legal services, financial services, or all the rest because they are now cheaper, and to a lesser extent on whether we can discover new things that households want to buy.
by mmastrac | 2025-07-19 10:14:22+00:00
It's an interesting choice, but every writer now needs to handle:

1) vectored i/o (array of arrays, lots of fun for cache lines)

2) buffering

3) a splat optimization for compression? (skipped over in this post, but mentioned in an earlier one)

I'm skeptical here, but I guess we will see if adding this overhead on all I/O is a win. Devirtualization helps _sometimes_ but when you've got larger systems it's entirely possible you've got sync and async I/O in the same optimization space and lose out on optimization opportunities.

In practice, I/O stacks tend to consist of a lot of composition, and in many cases, leak a lot of abstractions. Buffering is one part, corking/backpressure is another (neither of which is handled here, but I might be mistaken). In some cases, you've got meaningful framing on streams that needs to be maintained (or decorated with metadata).

If it works out, I suppose this will be a new I/O paradigm. In fairness, nobody has _really_ solved I/O yet, so maybe a brave new swing is what we need.
by mnw21cam | 2025-07-19 10:14:50+00:00
I'm just investigating why the nightly backup of the work server is taking so long. Turns out python (as conda, anaconda, miniconda, etc) have dumped 22 million files across the home directories, and this takes a while to just list, let alone work out which files have changed and need archiving. Most of these are duplicates of each other, and files that should really belong to the OS, like bin/curl.

I myself have installed one single package, and it installed 196,171 files in my home directory.

If that isn't gratuitous bloat, then I don't know what is.
by buran77 | 2025-07-19 10:15:55+00:00
> is revealing itself

Not really a revelation though. The ones with most of the power always leveraged any tool they had at their disposal to have their way and press everyone else into compliance. Sometimes it's carrot, sometimes it's stick. And they always applied rules selectively based not on what but on who. Just like the mafia, carving out special rules and dispensations for themselves.

Interference in other countries' affairs was the name of the game for at least a century. But for a long time now the US has no need to offer the carrot at all seeing how most times they can get anything they want with just the threat of the stick.

In this case not having a visa is probably a blessing in disguise. Better to know you're not wanted before you are detained at the border and "accidentally" extradited directly to a prison's gate.
by simgt | 2025-07-19 10:16:51+00:00
> the environmental impact of jackasses mining jackass coin, or jackasses training LLMs is not insignificant

Whataboutism. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism

> You're just pushing the idea that all human activity is some sort of disease that's best disposed of. That's essentially just wishing the worst on your own species for being successful.

Strawmaning. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

Every bloody mention of the environmental impact of our activities gets at least a reply like yours that ticks one of these boxes.
by gbuk2013 | 2025-07-19 10:16:53+00:00
Quick look: GSLB (via Akamai) for low latency, tricks like using CSS sprite to serve a single image in place of 20 or so for fewer round-trips, heavy use of caching, possibly some service worker magic but I didn't dig that far. :)

Basically, looks like someone deliberately did many right things without being lazy or cheap to create a performant web site.
by jononor | 2025-07-19 10:17:46+00:00
What would the "horse" equivalents be in this AI tech shift? Legit question - getting reasonable answers here might help us understand where we are going.

For sure it is not computers. Or software systems. We will for sure have way more of those. "Code" is more unclear, there will for sure be more of it - but for sure less human-hours per line of code. So the roles there will change quite a bit, though unclear exactly how. More focus on systems, business rules, specification, I suspect. Translations (between human languages) seems like a thing that is highly risky. It seems that it could go the way of the horse, automated translations being 99% of the volume eventually?
by devilbunny | 2025-07-19 10:18:05+00:00
> absolutely awful usability compared to the Euro

In what way? One unpleasant discovery I made in Portugal (and also saw to some extent in Spain) was that ATM’s - every one I could find, including those that were bank-owned at physical branches - had a limit of EUR200 per transaction regardless of my own bank limit (at USD1000/day, that should have been at least EUR800).

And while convenience stores, fast food, etc., won’t take a bill over $20 (which is understandable but really a trifling sum when you consider inflation - it’s a fast-food breakfast for three people), many other businesses are happy to do so. Nothing above $100 is in circulation anymore, and inflation means that $100 in 1980 is worth over $400 in today’s money even by government figures. A $20 bill 45 years ago was worth almost $100 in today’s money. And, of course, cash declaration rules have not updated the amounts to reflect this.
by unyttigfjelltol | 2025-07-19 10:19:05+00:00
LO is at least as functional as some other market leading SaaS word processors. LO could spin their product into a cloud application and not at all be "toast", because people in separate walled gardens no longer expect interoperability.

As for complexity, an illustration-- while using M365 I recently was confounded by a stretch of text that had background highlighting that was neither highlight markup, not paragraph or style formatting. An AI turned me onto an obscure dialog for background shading at a text level which explained the mystery. I've been a sophisticated user of M365 for decades and never encountered such a thing, nor have a clear idea of why anyone would use text-level background formatting in preference of the more obvious choices. Yet, there it is. With that kind of complexity and obscurity in the actual product, it's inevitable the file format would be convoluted and complex.
by ozim | 2025-07-19 10:19:19+00:00
Not fun part is that focusing on content will lead you to a place where you get customers using BS arguments for power play.

You want to be able to do everything just right for the looks. Because there always will be someone negotiating down because your PDF report does not look right and they know a competitor who „does this heading exactly right”.

In theory if you have garbled content that is not acceptable of course, but small deviations should be tolerated.

Unfortunately we have all kinds of power games where you want exact looks. You don’t always have option to walk away from asshole customers nitpicking on BS issues.
by Jolter | 2025-07-19 10:19:53+00:00
If there was a prominent online marketplace for homegrown literature, I would bet there would be corporate pushback against selling incest themed porn on it. But I don’t think there is such a marketplace so it’s a very hypothetical question.

If a book publisher was selling erotic fiction about children online, you could bet your ass they would have a hard time with payment processors.

I’m not sure you have a case with this argument.
by nosianu | 2025-07-19 10:20:19+00:00
> My guess is that both (cats and anime) hacked our visual network in a sense

It's not just cats. It's many furry mammals. But it's also most birds, which look completely different. And bees and bumblebees, even more different. To a lesser degree even some beetles and even turtles and frogs.

I would say a love of all of those is quote widespread, given how many of them are the main or major supporting characters of Youtube videos, movies, books and web novels and other publications.