MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by jorangreef | 2025-08-17 08:01:21+00:00
I heard on good authority that one of the earliest implementations of consensus at Google involved Sanjay Ghemawat tangentially. Sanjay's PhD on Harp, with Barbara Liskov, had also been based on Viewstamped Replication, and so, internally, this became the first flavor at Google. Later, it would come to be referred to externally as Paxos, only because that was more well known at the time.
by nosianu | 2025-08-17 08:02:05+00:00
This has nothing to do with the "node world". Such an enormous feature would have to go into ECMAScript. Which is very, very unlikely to ever happen, they may as well design a new language. All those runtimes implement that spec. Expecting them to write an extremely complex new feature that is easily more complicated than everything already implemented (especially with backwards compatibility, and given that the language was not designed for this) would be a bit much.

TypeScript is for compile time checking of a language that was not designed to have them. Runtime types have very different requirements! It has to be in the language from the early design phase, otherwise it will just be a hack with many conditions, restrictions and holes.

TS Types are only partially a description of the underlying types in the code, a very big part instead is that it provides guard rails that prevent you from using a lot of perfectly fine and valid JS code that would however be incompatible with type guarantees. You pay the price of using only a part of the large space of JS code possibilities for guarantees. If you were to put that into the runtime you would end up with two different versions of the language. If you still want to support the full JS you would end with two runtimes in one (or one that has so many branches and conditions that maintaining that runtime is a real beast).
by IshKebab | 2025-08-17 08:02:51+00:00
> Rust allows circular dependencies between modules within a single compilation unit, but crates can't be circular dependencies.

Yes, that's what I was saying.

> that's a circular dependency, because the `test` submodule imports items from the parent

This isn't a circular dependency because the parent doesn't import anything from the test module.

It would mean your compilation unit might have to be a subset of a module, but I think that's fine?
by mockingloris | 2025-08-17 08:04:30+00:00
Isn't it fascinating how vast and varied the human psyche is? Almost no two people are exactly alike in how their minds work. I here that some folks don't even have an internal monologue, they think in pictures, without any inner voice or words. Blows my mind every time I think about it.

Does anybody here relate? I'd like to know what that's like.
by nine_k | 2025-08-17 08:05:03+00:00
Why would it be illegal, if I'm not offering it publicly? Is running a VPN between my family computers illegal? Is ssh-ing onto a host and using the talk command illegal?

I suppose only public services, advertised for new users, are the target of the "chat control" directive. You can't join pseudonymously. But joining my VPN-based chat server would require being my acquaintance; should I ask an ID from a person I met at a pub? If so, should I ask their ID before I engage in a small talk with them in the pub?
by kev009 | 2025-08-17 08:06:21+00:00
This article is stuck in a very wide valley of being perhaps somewhat familiar with the domain concepts but nowhere near deep enough to draw any of the conclusions being drawn. It is close enough to being completely wrong.

The primary tradeoff of initcwnd is setting a reasonable window before you've learned anything about the path. BBR has little say on this because it takes, in relative terms, quite a while to go through its phases. An early BBR session is therefore not really superior to other congestion controls because that is not the problem it is really focused on.

Jacking up the initcwnd, you start to risk tail loss, which is the worst kind of loss for a sliding window.. especially in the primordial connection. There are ways of trying to deal with all that but they are loss predictions.

If you are a big enough operator, maybe you have some a priori knowledge to jack this up for certain situations. But people are also reckless and do not understand the tradeoffs or overall fairness that the transport community tries to achieve.

As other comments have pointed out, QUIC stacks also replicate congestion control and other algorithms based on the TCP RFCs. These are usually much simpler and lacking features compared to the mainline Linux TCP stack. It's not a free lunch and doesn't obviate the problem space any transport protocol has to make tradeoffs on.
by admash | 2025-08-17 08:07:26+00:00
One scenario would be if it scanned it once in 8 days and once in 4 days, due to, say, an elliptical orbit or something. Thus, twice in 12 days, but not once every 6 days.

Alternately, complex orbital tracks may result in irregular accumulation of multiple scans, with double scanning only finally being achieved after 12 days.
by perihelions | 2025-08-17 08:07:41+00:00
I don't know ARM, but an alternate approach, if it's available, is to store the query constants as bitmasks in SIMD registers; and use the input bytes as indices into those constants, using a shuffle instruction. Two levels, to pull out a bit from a 256-bit mask: part of an input byte is used to index a byte (SIMD shuffle), and another part indices a bit within the byte (bit shifts).

Idea being, this is constant in the size of the query set.
by agilob | 2025-08-17 08:07:45+00:00
Swapping software, pentesting, testing, QA, CI/CD pipelines, image caches aren't free either. Can we then start making more money as software developers to patch CVEs? We clearly should consider holding ourselves to a lower standard. Your requests are getting 5xx errors? Pay me more to fix it, not my problem that your requests is failing.
by balamatom | 2025-08-17 08:07:58+00:00
>lack (or only have remnants of)

I'd say have been successfully precluded from developing that.

Instead, they've learned to substitute its functionality with the quasi-religious faith that they are actually any good at inferring what others think. (Take that precept away and see em flail, it's disturbing.)

At population scale, this resolves to either mass violent panic or a society living under the constant self-fulfilling prophecy that fewer things are thinkable than those which are possible, while screaming that it's the other way around. (Instead of, you know, aiming for the parity between interpretation and reality which is necessary to accomplish anything at all.)

The main neurotypical trait is lack of inherent revulsion to delusion.
by unsupp0rted | 2025-08-17 08:08:01+00:00
> and the only way is to let them be for a while

Let them be for a while at home.

I’m a member of human society too. Me and 80% of the people on the plane can’t stand the selfishness but have the self-control not to say anything, because it’ll do no good anyway.

But if there were an airline that charged double for rejecting kids under the “shut up” age, I’d pay double for my seat and I bet I’m not alone.
by oDot | 2025-08-17 08:11:29+00:00
The whole line of Tanstack products is very well made yet poorly designed at the same time. I don't know if it's inherited from React by trying (and succeeding) to be a seamless React experience or if it's part of their own philosophy, but most of the tools make it very easy to mix state everywhere in your app which is just bad.

Really people should just move to Gleam and Lustre or Elm, even if it means I'll have much fewer clients paying good money to untangle state issues...
by uludag | 2025-08-17 08:11:32+00:00
I totally get the point your trying to make. I guess what I'm trying to say is that I think it's unfair/misleading that anything with a veneer of LLMs has all the credit driven to the LLM and not to the thing that provides the bulk of the value.

Like for example, clearly you are a very experienced developer with a vast amount of experience. To say that the extent and reach to which you are able to apply technologies is because LLMs seems wrong; it's your rich technical background which allow you to use LLMs in an effective manner.
by ninetyninenine | 2025-08-17 08:11:46+00:00
Can't be too hard imo. Primitives can contain an extra metadata field for the types defined in the code. This doesn't really interfere with the runtime and will be backwards compatible. The runtime of course still doesn't actually have to do any type checking, it's just forwarding the type information on a new metadata field so it's not in any way interrupting the core flow of the runtime logic. As a result you can still have the wrong type tagged onto a primitive just like TS has it currently.

Only downside I see is that It can slow down the code as the runtime now has to evaluate type level functions in order to know what to place in the metadata.

But you're right in the sense that it has to go into the core ECMA specification rather then being a node project.
by willguest | 2025-08-17 08:13:06+00:00
There was quite a bit of other "insight" around this, but I was paraphrasing for brevity.

If you want to read the whole convo, I dumped it into a semi-formatted document:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1aEkzmB-3LUZAVgbyu_97DjHcrM9...
by mdp2021 | 2025-08-17 08:15:09+00:00
> Let me know when you find one of these "rational agents".

Hi there.

> Again, livability "for whom?"

For the rational. The people who tend to dis-want electroshocking cutlery and miasmatic nail polish.

> Do you propose

That societies work on making citizens informed and rational, just like classic economic theory suggested and as is required for the common advantage.
by Dylan16807 | 2025-08-17 08:16:08+00:00
1. If you're calling my first question irrelevant, the one about why the system was installed, then why were you the one originally making claims about that, and using it to blame certain people?

2. "Slower is better." is a stupid half argument. Speed limits are a tradeoff between the benefits of going fast and the benefits of going slow. If it wasn't a tradeoff then the speed limit would be walking speed everywhere on every road.
by Joeri | 2025-08-17 08:16:23+00:00
LLMs are not people, but they are still minds, and to deny even that seems willfully luddite.

While they are generating tokens they have a state, and that state is recursively fed back through the network, and what is being fed back operates not just at the level of snippets of text but also of semantic concepts. So while it occurs in brief flashes I would argue they have mental state and they have thoughts. If we built an LLM that was generating tokens non-stop and could have user input mixed into the network input, it would not be a dramatic departure of today’s architecture.

It also clearly has goals, expressed in the RLHF tuning and the prompt. I call those goals because they directly determine its output, and I don’t know what a goal is other than the driving force behind a mind’s outputs. Base model training teaches it patterns, finetuning and prompt teaches it how to apply those patterns and gives it goals.

I don’t know what it would mean for a piece of software to have feelings or concerns or emotions, so I cannot say what the essential quality is that LLMs miss for that. Consider this thought exercise: if we were to ever do an upload of a human mind, and it was executing on silicon, would they not be experiencing feelings because their thoughts are provably a deterministic calculation?

I don’t believe in souls, or at the very least I think they are a tall claim with insufficient evidence. In my view, neurons in the human brain are ultimately very simple deterministic calculating machines, and yet the full richness of human thought is generated from them because of chaotic complexity. For me, all human thought is pattern matching. The argument that LLMs cannot be minds because they only do pattern matching … I don’t know what to make of that. But then I also don’t know what to make of free will, so really what do I know?
by Imustaskforhelp | 2025-08-17 08:16:25+00:00
Hm alright, so in the meanwhile, the best place to use xet might be huggingface

I am wondering since a lot of people have said that for things like gamedev etc., git isn't best because of lfs issues and xet fixes it, could I use huggingface as a repository if I am gamedev or would that go against since huggingface is for AI stuff?

Also thanks for open sourcing it, I hope that it would be in permissive license and open sourcing the spec + protocol might actually push the git community to be better which is really nice!
by MrJohz | 2025-08-17 08:16:54+00:00
I think it's not fair to say that Typescript isn't about improving safety, just that the mechanism isn't the same as with other languages. Typescript had always allowed you to ignore the type checker (in fact, the default configuration will always attempt to emit compiled Javascript, even if the source Typescript has type errors). But if you run the type checker on every commit (via e.g. CI or a precommit hook), then you can be sure that the code you release is correctly typed, which will not guarantee it is safe, but makes it more likely.

I agree that it's better to think of Typescript as a linter that needs specialised annotations to work, rather than a type system like you might find in Java or Rust.
by KronisLV | 2025-08-17 08:17:09+00:00
I was gonna make a broader point about survivorship bias and how sometimes the fence is indeed on and trying again and again will just end up with you being charred, but it was perhaps a bit too negative sounding.

The example of reaching out to people will seldom go all that badly (though sometimes people aren’t who you think they are and you will have to block them), but there are definitely decisions in life that shouldn’t be made lightly.
by rorads | 2025-08-17 08:18:03+00:00
I would have liked to have seen the underlying token count, and the full responses as an optional filter. My understanding is that under the hood the GPT-5 response (as well as omitted O model responses) would end with the presented output, but would have had many paragraphs of “The user wants X, so I should try to Y. Okay this z needs to be considered” etc.

It doesn’t detract from the progress, but I think it would change how you interpret it. In some ways 4 / 4o were more impressive because they were going straight to output with a lower number of tokens produced to get a good response.
by terribleperson | 2025-08-17 08:18:56+00:00
I agree it's hard to draw a bright line, but I'm personally comfortable erring heavily on the side of defect for security issues.

I'd be willing to agree that certain security issues might not constitute a manufacturing or design defect. If a thought-to-be-secure encryption was cracked tomorrow, that doesn't make products using it defective at the time of manufacture.
by protocolture | 2025-08-17 08:20:45+00:00
>The lives of the Palestinians would be better if as a culture and society, they accepted what happened and built new lives. The Israelis did.

The Israelis imported jewish people from all over the world to live on land that they pushed the palestinians out of. Its not exactly an equivalent "Move on" situation. Moving on would be aided by getting access to their land.

>However there’s no justice in saying only one of the two groups (the Palestinians) should be given their grand parents lands and properties back. That’s what the right of return of Palestinians would be as the Arab Muslim nations aren’t going to reciprocate for the displaced Jews.

I mean, happy for jewish refugees to be returned to various arab countries, heck even germany. I would not argue if they wanted to return to where they were removed from in living memory. The issue is that they don't, they are happy living on Palestinian land, while holding palestinians hostage.

>Then perhaps do you know enough of the history to be aware that Palestinians are largely descendants of the extremist Islamic colonizers who conquered the lands starting a thousand years back? The indigenous peoples there weren’t Arabs after all.

I am aware, but 1000 years ago is kind of outside of our timescale. If it helps, sometimes I do think Britain would be better off without the angles or saxons, but too much time has passed in both circumstances.

>Again, I’ll point out that Arabs in Israel have equal rights as citizens and better lives than those in most of the surrounding Arab countries. There’s certainly some racism against them but they can and do build prosperous lives.

Its fairly plainly false. Again, you speak of knowing so much about the region, but if you see how people are forced to live in the west bank you would never use the term equal.

You should really educate yourself on this topic.
by luckylion | 2025-08-17 08:21:33+00:00
> I'm not defining liberties as privileges, I'm merely pointing out that your right to liberty ends where it infringes on somebody else's (and vice versa).

Yet you included privileges (like getting tax-funded things) in those liberties that would be affected. That's muddying the waters. I'm sure you're well aware of the escalating utilitarian thought experiments that use the same type of argument ("but many people would benefit from doing X to Y").

On guns: You're moving the goal post from guns being carried to guns being used. Statistically, you don't need to worry about guns being drawn in normal interactions in the USA - it happens, it happens a lot more often than in Europe, but it's not like there's a daily shoot-out at the grocery store unless you live in some areas with a lot of gang activity.

But risk-perception is subjective. Where I spend a month in the US doing average things and expect to not see a single gun being raised, you might expect to see them on two occasions. Is expectation of risk a liberty that's infringed? I don't think so.

There's plenty of good arguments for strong firearm regulation, but it's not a freedom vs freedom thing. There's a right not to be harmed, but it doesn't extend to potential abstract harm.
by lukan | 2025-08-17 08:22:07+00:00
"One of the main characteristics of the society is that its members take business in what other people do with their own lives."

That is your definition of societey, but one I consider close to totalitarian. And yeah, sadly it is the standard, but there are societies that stick together, so each member has better chances of living their own live and not so each members lives the live that the others force them to live.
A tiny browser game I built using HTML5, CSS, JavaScript and Cloudflare CDN
by business_liveit | 2025-08-17 08:22:25+00:00
Hi HN, I’m a solo developer and recently built Basketball Bros, a small browser game designed to kill a few minutes.

I used HTML5, CSS, and JavaScript to keep it lightweight and responsive, and leveraged Cloudflare CDN and caching techniques to ensure fast load times anywhere in the world.

My goal was to create a smooth, minimal-lag experience that works instantly in any browser. I’d love to hear feedback from the community—especially on performance, gameplay, or ideas for improvement.

Link to play: https://basketball-bros.online
by lemoncookiechip | 2025-08-17 08:22:51+00:00
I dunno, man. I think this one is kinda funny.

"You ever notice how self-checkout machines are just training us to be employees? Like, I don’t remember applying to work at Walmart. I’m scanning groceries, bagging stuff, looking around like, do I also get dental? The machine yells 'Unexpected item in bagging area'—yeah, it’s my pride." -GPT5
by boris | 2025-08-17 08:23:19+00:00
> And because Electric syncs every change granularly, you are certain that the state of your local database is exactly the same as the server's.

I don't see how this certainty follows from "granularity" (whatever that means in this context). I believe to have such a certainty one would need the synchronization to happen within a single transaction that spans both client and server databases.
by florbnit | 2025-08-17 08:23:34+00:00
> Pay me more to fix it, not my problem that your requests is failing.

If you are employed in a position where there is a defect in the product then you are already being paid. Imagine going to a restaurant and you get an uncooked frozen steak, and when you tell the waiter they tell you that since the cook will need to spend more time on it you now have to pay extra.
by kelnos | 2025-08-17 08:24:11+00:00
In JSON/REST API bindings, where a deserializer maps JSON to language-native object/struct type, I'll often need to know the difference between:

{}

and

{ "foo": null }

and

{ "foo": 42 }

So I'll represent that (in e.g. Rust) as:

struct Whatever { foo: Option<Option<u32>>, }

None means not present, Some(None) means present but null, and Some(Some(42)) means present with a value.

I'll often use this in PATCH endpoints, where not-present means to leave the current value alone, null means to unset it, and a value means to set to that value.
by florbnit | 2025-08-17 08:25:48+00:00
The story has a bad spin yes. But it’s just as much of a controversy if they had require people themselves pay the cost if they found out the cars where shipped with defective breaks. It’s a product error not wear and tear or user error, they should eat the costs, but the cybersecurity framing of it is being used to attempt to push the cost to the consumer.
by Sponge5 | 2025-08-17 08:25:56+00:00
Yocto doesn't run GUI applications, it's a framework to make your own distro. The fact that many users are too lazy to create a user to run their application as, speaks of the embedded space in general rather than Yocto in particular.

> I'd suggest just looking at another distribution

You won't find one. With many vendors, it's the only option.
by thrance | 2025-08-17 08:27:50+00:00
Are we allowed to flag AI-generated articles? I feel like we should be.

I certainly did flag this one, it starts with an egregiously stupid AI "illustration" of the plant, and ends with "This article is based on verified sources and supported by editorial technologies", aka an AI wrote this.

Low-effort, full of inaccuracies = get that out of my sight, please.
by Juliate | 2025-08-17 08:28:54+00:00
I am not accusing, I am perceiving that from your stance.

No. You should derive from that that human life, and humanities being part of that, are a matter of experience, more than of argument/convincing. I could spend some time to argue with you about that, but you're showing you are not open to such a discussion, and my time is more valuable (and yours) than that.

It's like sex, intimacy, sight, smell, touch: you can't argue about it or explain it to someone who never experienced it.

It's definitely hard to argue or demonstrate how sometimes a book, a painting, a music can turn around your whole perspective on things.
by themafia | 2025-08-17 08:29:58+00:00
The thing I did not expect is that most of these criminals will gladly connect their phone to the cars entertainment system so they can play their music while they do this.

They can then brag about the number of thefts they've engaged in by the number of Kia vehicles listed in their phones bluetooth connection list.

The surprise is that the police don't seem to understand how to incorporate these facts into their tactics.
by Hilift | 2025-08-17 08:30:21+00:00
> But I thought in EU and US things are different.

Different indeed.

Privacy is enforced through compliance and civil court actions. In 2018, one of the largest actual data breaches at the time (~300 million customer records) netted about $0.25 per record in penalties, after several years of lawyering. ($52 million (US)/$23 million (UK)).

The EU makes more money fining companies for policy violations:

A €1.2 billion ($1.3 billion) fine was imposed by the Irish Data Protection Commission (DPC) for transferring Facebook users' personal data from the EU to the US in violation of GDPR.

That is what privacy is about.

https://nationalcioreview.com/articles-insights/extra-bytes/...