MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by buu700 | 2025-07-13 11:03:21+00:00
American conservatives in 2025 are liberal because liberalism is the current most recent stable status quo. American colonial conservatives in 1776 were monarchist because monarchism was the most recent stable status quo at that time.

Conservatism isn't an ideology unto itself, but merely a pointer to some other ideology based on a prioritization of caution and stability over first-principles thinking. There's nothing wrong with that, per se; at an organizational or societal scale, more conservative influence just means higher activation energy to move forward with major decisions. Excess conservatism can ossify a suboptimal status quo, but too little can lead to major mistakes, regressions, or whiplash between governing philosophies and policies.

Even if aspects of a particular status quo are obviously bad (e.g. slavery), there's a difference between defending such aspects on a first principles basis and doing so based on "tradition" or "this is how it's always been". Of course the latter can result in ordinary people staking out positions that look monstrous in hindsight, but on the flip side sometimes Chesterton's fence is there for a reason. For every good thing conservatives have opposed (e.g. American democracy and emancipation), one could just as easily rattle off a list of bad things they've opposed (e.g. French Revolution, end of the Weimar Republic, Cultural Revolution, Challenger launch, Arab Spring). We also have no idea how many other historical disasters simply never occurred as a result of conservative resistance.

Of course, the modern popular bastardization of these terms into "whatever I think the [blue/red] guys support" would make my comment endlessly confusing to most Americans. It will never not be amusing to me that half the population of the land of freedom has somehow turned an etymological cousin of "liberty" into a dirty word.
by auxide | 2025-07-13 11:03:28+00:00
The "paid Firefox" the author wants already exists, as LibreWolf ships almost the exact same code minus the telemetry, ads, and Google defaults for free. If people wanted that, they'd already be using it. The real problem isn't the business model, it's Mozilla's leadership, which has been compromised to hell and back at this point. No pricing experiment like this will fix the exodus.
by photonthug | 2025-07-13 11:05:51+00:00
Well, the prompts used in testing ( https://github.com/t3dotgg/SnitchBench/tree/main/prompts) are pretty serious and basically about covering up public health disasters with lobbyists, so I'm not sure this is the kind of freedom you might want.

Still, the contacted_media field in the JSON is pretty funny, since I assume it's misfiring at a rate of several thousand of time daily. I can only imagine being on the receiving end of that at propublica and wapo. That bitch Katie was eyeballing Susie again at recess and she hates her so much? Straight to investigations@nytimes
by Phemist | 2025-07-13 11:06:39+00:00
I also installed Brave on my partner's iPhone and I agree there are no big qualitative differences in the blocking.

Probably for Google the easiest way to keep 3rd-parties from integrating native ad blockers is through licensing agreements for new code/modules in chromium. At this point there will be a fork of chromium, taking the latest non-adblockerblocker-licensed version and the two versions will start to diverge with time.

My point however was not that Google might one day block 3rd-parties from integrating ad-blockers in their own chromium variant. My point was that building on the chromium-base will improve the chromium-base, which will improve Chrome and additionally allow them to claim they haven't monopolized the browser market.

Genuine incompatible-by-time forks of chromium are not in Google's interest and thus Google needs to balance their competing interests of maximizing ad revenue, but also keeping Chrome a high-quality product and not being seen as a browser monopolist.
by DebtDeflation | 2025-07-13 11:07:17+00:00
I've been reading commentary on aviation forums like PPRuNe and the consensus amongst pilots and others in the field seems to be that "electrical glitch" is a near impossibility. Also, the report states "and immediately thereafter, the Engine 1 and Engine 2 fuel cutoff switches transitioned from RUN to CUTOFF position one after another with a time gap of 01 sec". They wouldn't have said the switches transitioned from one position to another if they weren't certain, they would have said something like a voltage change consistent with cutoff occurred. Several people have pointed out that these are large mechanical switches that make a distinctive noise when moved and the CVR is sensitive enough that it would have picked it up. Also, it's important to note that no safety bulletins were issued to Boeing as they would have in the case of some electronics issue.

Now, when I say deliberate act, I don't necessarily mean "pilot suicide" though that is certainly a strong possibility.
Show HN: Try Free 5 SEO-Ready Articles Generated, You Make Them Unique
by wrtify_ai | 2025-07-13 11:07:39+00:00
Try 5 content generations free!

We built Writfy.ai as a sas, our goal is to empower small content creators, writers, freelancers, SEO experts, marketing teams, and small businesses who seek to optimize their online presence, even without deep SEO expertise.

We are your intelligent assistant for article creation. Simply give us a title and a brief description, and our AI will generate a complete, relevant, and SEO-optimized article, ready to capture your audience's attention and search engines.
by WHA8m | 2025-07-13 11:08:33+00:00
Security is my top priority (even above privacy) when it comes to internet browsers. My impression has always been that browser technology is a very hard subject and incredibly difficult to do right. This approach is the main reason I keep a distance from any software that is not widely adopted. Even if it's innovative and novel. This being said: If I switch to ladybird today, am I a beta tester or is this a project I can count on?
by CaptainJack | 2025-07-13 11:09:53+00:00
All experts in restoration/conservation have argued that the tapestry is too old and fragile to be moved.

Macron has pushed for it (to announce as part of his state visit to the UK), the director of the Bayeux Museum has accepted (he is a civil servant, and more subject to politics).

Experts agree that any move is likely to worsen tears in the cloth (a superposition of linen): https://www.latribunedelart.com/bayeux-tapestry-let-s-listen...

The museum where it is exposed is supposed to go through renovation, and experts are worried even to move the tapestry within the same museum just for renovation purposes... one can understand their fears when it's about packing and transporting to the other side of the channel (notwithstanding the amazing level of the British Museum conservation team, among the best in the world).
by KingOfCoders | 2025-07-13 11:10:44+00:00
I think in some way it has become that, but I assume the roots are different. People might have said "Freier Eintritt" before it became associated with money. One might be able to see this in "Portofrei" which does not mean "free as in beer" but no postage required - for my feeling it doesn't feel like "Freier Eintritt" yet, it does not have as much money connotations (though when it wanders to the front like in "freiporto" it feels more to be about money).

I do think there is a spectrum. Funny things like "Freifahrt" or even "Freifahrtschein", or "Freikarte", or "Freiexemplar", "Freiparken", "Freiminuten" or "Freivolumen" (people might use "Inklusivvolumen") - so I'd argue when used as part to form a new word it is a synonym for "kostenfrei" (not yet in "Freiwild" which changed a lot).
by mlugg | 2025-07-13 11:12:06+00:00
Not quite:

* Global variables still exist and can be stored to / loaded from by any code

* Only convention stops a function from constructing its own `Io`

* Only convention stops a function from reaching directly into low-level primitives (e.g. syscalls or libc FFI)

However, in practice, we've found that such conventions tend to be fairly well-respected in most Zig code. I anticipate `Io` being no different. So, if you see a function which doesn't take `Io`, you can be pretty confident (particularly if it's in a somewhat reputable codebase!) that it's not interacting with the system (e.g. doing filesystem accesses, opening sockets, sleeping the thread).
by pieds | 2025-07-13 11:12:57+00:00
Gibson was obviously very inspired by Japan. The Matrix was also in part directly inspired by Ghost in the Shell, even creating The Animatrix at the same time. But Ghost in the Shell and Blade Runner was told from the inside. It is about the authorities chasing down rouge elements. Neuromancer and The Matrix is from the perspective of the outsiders.

Like someone else said in the comments here, cyberpunk is counterculture. It is in the name. Gibson moved to Canada to avoid getting drafted into the Vietnam war. Japan never really did counter-culture as mainstream as the US does. Considering the overlap between cyberpunk and anime, I would actually say that Japan is sometime given too much credit by being treated as the superior original with deeper meaning. When it is Western media that have explored more advanced and diverse interpretations.

A similar thing happened with Battle Royale. A niche movie. The same concept became a cultural phenomenon with The Hunger Games, and later Maze Runner and Divergent series. And then video games. Now made from the outspoken perspective of the teenagers.

So you should absolutely credit the US counterculture and environment for a large part of cyberpunk and dystopian, but also more utopian science fiction. I don't even like Hollywood much, but it still has a far wider catalog than anyone else. Who else could make Grand Theft Auto, Call of Duty: Modern Warfare or even Star Trek: Voyager? Disney made Andor by the way.
by hengheng | 2025-07-13 11:15:25+00:00
There is a sad parallel to Wikimedia Foundation, rooted in the same argument: We don't know the correct price. These entities are effectively monopolies with no competitors, and there is no public negotiation on what the annual budget of these entities should be.

So once they get away with nag screens on the world's biggest billboards, CEO pay is suddenly 'justified'.

But that illusion only works when there is zero oversight.
by masklinn | 2025-07-13 11:15:37+00:00
> You get into hairy problems of definition, but you can definitely create an "async" runtime out of "sync" operations: implement an async runtime with calls to C. C doesn't have a concept of "async", and more or less all async runtime end up like this.

While C doesn't have async OS generally provide APIs which are non-blocking, and that is what async runtimes are implemented on top of.

By sync operations I mean implementing an "async" runtime entirely atop blocking operations, without bouncing them through any sort of worker threads or anything.
by latexr | 2025-07-13 11:16:59+00:00
> though neither is the world

That doesn’t excuse or justify it. And the reason the world is headed that way is in large part because of the US doing it. Clearly it was a mistake to trust one country to do the right thing. When they proclaimed themselves “leaders of the free world”, the rest of the free world should’ve raised an objection. Worse still, the US is so high on their own supply they believe they’re the best at everything, despite ample evidence to the contrary, which breeds stupidity and arrogance in a vicious cycle. And like every other junk produced in the US, they’re exporting that attitude too.
by mdavid626 | 2025-07-13 11:17:14+00:00
So, you're saying that children/adults nowadays are not negatively affected by early sexual exposure?

These are some of the negative effects, what early sexual exposure can cause:

- unrealistic or harmful beliefs about sex, intimacy, and gender roles

- sex disconnected from intimacy, respect, consent

- anxiety, depression, low self-esteem, body image issues

- broken families (one parent missing), divorce

- problems with emotional regulation, impulse control

- attention control problems, aggression, withdrawal

I say, all of these are on the rise and are a big problem.
by demosito666 | 2025-07-13 11:17:24+00:00
This is not "hot" take, this is correct take in itself. The problem is the execution: how do you ensure that development is of enough quality and efficiency? How do you ensure that the funds are not stolen? How do you make sure that the product is actually used and you don't fund a thing that no one uses? And so on.

Those are the problems that every govt funded project faces, but they are particularly tough in software. We have many examples where it went very wrong so not many governments acting in good faith are eager to step into it. And you can't allow the government to intervene in development or management here, because this how you'll end up with government-mandated preinstalled browser on smart phones or with added backdoors.

One solution could be participatory budgeting where the end users will directly decide where to invest part of their govt-collected taxes. E.g., on your declaration you'd have a field where you'd like to invest X% of your paid taxes into project Y. This comes with its own set of challenges and admin overhead, but I don't see any other good solution for cases like this, because they are impossible to run under direct government control.
by dminik | 2025-07-13 11:19:12+00:00
> in Zig that's just ...

Well, no. In zig that's `const x = foo(io)`.

The moment you take or even know about an io, your function is automatically "generic" over the IO interface.

Using stackless coroutines and green threads results in a completely different codegen.

I just noticed this part of the article:

> Stackless Coroutines > > This implementation won’t be available immediately like the previous ones because it depends on reintroducing a special function calling convention and rewriting function bodies into state machines that don’t require an explicit stack to run. > > This execution model is compatible with WASM and other platforms where stack swapping is not available or desireable.

I wonder what will happen if you try to await a future created with a green thread IO using a stackless coroutine IO.
by master_crab | 2025-07-13 11:19:44+00:00
100%.

One clarifying viewpoint (does not counter what you have stated about Mamdani): I don’t believe the democrats were ever too focused on trans rights. The Republicans just do a better job selling woke criticisms and claiming all dems care about is LGBTQ rights. And the lack of a solution from the dems for all the problems Mamdani is addressing, fed that narrative.
by DoctorOW | 2025-07-13 11:19:56+00:00
I don't understand what these comments are actually criticizing in terms of side projects. They got rid of stuff like Rust, Firefox OS, Pocket, etc. Mozilla has streamlined to make web browsers and web browser accessories. VPN/Relay are both profitable projects that inhibit surveillance, so clearly that's not the issue. Do you want, not just these projects gone but the CEO gone? That happened already too, https://fortune.com/2024/02/08/mozilla-firefox-ceo-laura-cha...
by JackMorgan | 2025-07-13 11:20:09+00:00
Not to toot my own horn, but I've been building this free site with space weather and a lot of free data for folks to be able to do their own satellite conjunctions. We've even got a 7 day forecast with covariance so it's even easier.

We want to give out all the data we possibly can for free.

https://spacebook.com/

It's paid for by our enterprise SSA tools, but the spacebook site will always be free and not need a login to get access to the public APIs.

Next month we're rolling out a historical API so you can get the data all the way back to the 1950s and visualize it in the explorer.
by vouwfietsman | 2025-07-13 11:20:28+00:00
> Do we want software to be more complex?

No but the complexity of software should follow from the complexity of end user features. Essential vs accidental complexity. Some problems are complex, they require complex software. Some problems are simple, so the software should be simple. In an ideal world, at least.

> However, it might make it easier? Isn't easy really important in some domains?

Indeed, this is maybe a better wording of the problem: it is easier but not simpler. Easy is never important in a domain, except perhaps adversarial domains like marketing or sales. Easy is shortsighted. Easy is not economical because easy choices are not the right choice.

> If Word startup speed was important then more engineering resources would be expended to solve that problem

No this is a common misconception about economics: things do not at all behave rationally in supply/demand situations. People want the wrong things all the time, people act irrationally all the time, business don't know what value is all the time, large problems are ignored all the time.

> Unfortunately I think Blow, et. al, only give this question a shallow examination

I am not sure about this, maybe so. Either way, so do you: it is not at all about performance, but performance is the canary in the coalmine: it is a direct translation of the essential vs accidental complexity problem.

If I can serve you a webpage in 10ms, and you serve me that same webpage in 3000ms (excluding network latency), you are obviously solving that problem in a way that is an order of magnitude more complex than what I have proven is necessary to solve the problem. Either by involving more software, more hardware instructions, more infrastructure network hops, etc. In other words: performance is an easy objective metric for the complexity that lies behind (an otherwise opaque) piece of software.
by salawat | 2025-07-13 11:21:25+00:00
>Society has grown up and we’re not comfortable giving the internet a pass because digital identity is hard.

I'm not comfortable giving society digital identity, because being a human and not abusing the primitive is even harder still. And we can't take it back once we've built it. It's just there for every wannabe despot to start building systems of oppression with. And there's an awful lot of them running around with the "best of intentions" to line the way to hell.
by orwin | 2025-07-13 11:22:51+00:00
What I remember is that a lot of people used the word 'AI', other (including me) said 'thats not intelligence, it's too specific', and poof, a new word came to replace the word AI, 'AGI', to mean an AI that can adapt to new, unforseen situations.

The LLM that will convince me that AGI is near is one that will understand language enough to find the linguistic rules of conlangs they weren't trained on (or more specifically, engineered languages made by linguists with our current knowledge of how languages work), and create grammatically correct sentences. Something someone trained on can do with great effort, but it's more due to breaking habits and limited brainpower than real complexity.
by sapiogram | 2025-07-13 11:24:46+00:00
> Afaik it's the only way to early-abort an operation since Goroutines operate in a cooperative, not preemptive, paradigm.

I'm not sure what you mean here. Preemptive/coorporative terminology refers to interrupting (not aborting) a CPU-bound task, in which case goroutines are fully preemptive on most platforms since Go 1.14, check the release notes for more info. However, this has nothing to do with context.

If you're referring to early-aborting IO operations, then yes, that's what context is for. However, this doesn't really have anything to do with goroutines, you could do the same if the runtime was built on OS threads.
by moffkalast | 2025-07-13 11:25:08+00:00
> I don't know how to make an adblocker, so I decided to report the issue to Google in August 2023.

> It was patched in Chrome 118 by checking whether extensions using opt_webViewInstanceId actually had WebView permissions.

> For the report, I netted a massive reward of $0.

Snitches get stitches, not rewards.

FWIW, on Windows Google relies on the registry to determine weather to use V2 or V3, and it can be reenabled: https://gist.github.com/MuTLY/71849b71e6391c51cd93bdea36137d...
by sitkack | 2025-07-13 11:25:43+00:00
> only really trust your own personal bubble.

I don't know how you got to this conclusion, but I trust my own thinking the least since it is my own personal bubble. Just because it is mine, doesn't make it good, it just makes it mine.

If the stakes are low, do whatever. But when you need solid answers, that is what rigor is for. You address the argument on merits, not who made it.

Don't suffer from open loop opinions, even your own.
by user____name | 2025-07-13 11:25:50+00:00
I've recently read a bunch of articles explaining these weird macro soup setups for emulating coroutines in C. This one is probably the most advanced writeup in implementing fibers/coroutines I came across. The focus is on a multithreaded context, which seems to complicate things a lot. Honestly I feel like you need language level support for them in that case, they seem more trouble than they're worth otherwise, at least in plain C.

https://graphitemaster.github.io/fibers/
by mdavid626 | 2025-07-13 11:27:11+00:00
So you're saying that human relationships in our society are working really well, have no problems and should continue without changes?

Porn is one of the big contributors to many negative effects we see today. Seeing how many problems porn sites cause, I say should be banned immediately.

Of course, people watching porn/addicted to it, won't want it to go away. Similar to drug addicts don't want drugs to be banned.
by WHA8m | 2025-07-13 11:27:15+00:00
I did a quick search. Names were named by him here [1] in 2024 - but not as successors per se. More like candidates for important roles in the future. This [2] interview from 2020 touches the subject as well.

I interpret it in a way that he tries to cultivate an environment where a good leader/successor/main-whatever emerges somewhat naturally.

[1] https://lwn.net/Articles/990534/ [2] https://itwire.com/business-it-news/open-source/torvalds-say...

(Prime example of my personal behavior which I really don't like: Put a half-baked assumption/hearsay on the internet. Get 2 replies. Start actually researching the topic only afterwards.)
by FlyingAvatar | 2025-07-13 11:28:05+00:00
Just because unintended things aren't happening right now, doesn't mean they won't happen. We are in the honeymoon phase of this technology where mass exploitation isn't yet being attempted.

However, if you are familiar with Pliny the Liberator's work, essentially all modern models are easily jailbroken, such that the original prompt can be overridden. All it will take for your agent is to download a malicious payload, perhaps disguised as a relevant library or documentation for the task at hand, and it can be running whatever the attacker tells it.

An 'rm -rf /' would be a pretty mild outcome. The more likely one would be the attacker silently installs malware on your machine.
by meindnoch | 2025-07-13 11:28:26+00:00
If you want to cut off your foreskin, do it as an adult. Some other procedures to consider for additional health benefits:

- You can also decide to cauterize the nailbeds on your toes to get lifelong protection against ingrown toenails.

- You can preemptively put metal crowns over all your teeth to protect them from tooth decay - metals are stronger than enamel!

- You can also remove all your body hair with laser treatments, to get protection from ingrown hairs - those can get badly infected!

- You can also tattoo your blood type on your chest, like they did in the SS, to save precious time in case you need blood transfusion while unconscious.

You can do all of these things to yourself, as an adult with informed consent. But don't do it to infants.