MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by mstratman | 2025-08-14 03:50:28+00:00
What worked best in my experience is having a roundtable discussion between all the interviewers about their experience, and any concerns or objections they have. i.e. soft veto.

The hiring manager had the ultimate say, though. But he/she had to acknowledge, address, and own any objection and take personal responsibility for it if the candidate was hired.

When you have a good team who is earnestly focused on preserving a good team, it works really well. Red flag objections were pretty much never ignored, and were effectively vetoes. Minor objections or slight concerns about experience or aptitude, if they were overridden, prompted hiring managers to take extra time and care to help ensure the new hire's success.
by chrisco255 | 2025-08-14 03:51:39+00:00
The left used to be more individualist in the U.S. (circa 90s most definitely) but it developed a toxic groupthink as it came to dominate pop culture and media in the 00s and 10s, and began to leverage that to employ censorship, deplatforming, doxxing, etc and it became incredibly dogmatic and if anyone diverged from a particular narrative (ie skeptical covid came from wet market), they would be ridiculed, shouted down, laughed off, shamed, kicked off social media platforms, ostracized, etc which is cult like behavior.

The left of the 90s would have never stood for that. They were the die hards for free speech then. Something shifted.
by nine_k | 2025-08-14 03:52:01+00:00
While at it: what was / is holding Ada back? I haven't seen a single open-source project built in Ada, nor did I hear about any closed-source corporate project that uses Ada's superpowers. (Most likely these exist! But I did not see any available, or at least well-publicized.)

People agree to go to great lengths to use a tool that has some kind of superpower, despite syntactic weirdness or tooling deficiencies. People study and use LISP descendants like Clojure, APL descendants like K, "academic" languages like Haskell and OCaml, they write hobby projects in niche languages like Nim or Odin, they even use even C++ templates.

Why is Ada so under-represented? It must have a very mature ecosystem. I suspect that it's just closed-source mostly, and the parties involved don't see much value in opening up. If so, Ada is never going to make it big, and will slowly retreat under the pressure of better-known open alternatives, even in entrenched areas like aerospace.
by Grimblewald | 2025-08-14 03:52:38+00:00
I have no faith in elon products for one simple reason: if you have talent you have options and if you have options, why would anything elon has tainted be anywhere near the top?

There was a time it was reasonable, early space x days for example, when elon was still managable, easily abstracted away and you were able to work with better funding and less red tape vs other options - but modern times i cannot see a reason one would work with elon unless desperate or in the cult, and lets be honest, you dont reason your way into joining cults.
by laurencerowe | 2025-08-14 03:53:03+00:00
While RISC OS was very impressive as a GUI, like classic Mac OS it lacked preemptive multitasking and memory protection, having been designed to run on the base 512KB Archimedes 305.

I believe AmigaOS was the only home computer OS of that era with preemptive multitasking, but the GUI looked pretty bad, I think having originally been designed to work on TVs rather than dedicated monitors.
by kazinator | 2025-08-14 03:53:25+00:00
My position doesn't revolve around the mechanics of preprocessing. Say we have somehow given the implementation a translation unit which has #include <winkle.h>. Say we did not give the implementation a file winkle.h; we did not place such a file in any of the places where it searches for include files.

OK, now suppose that the implementation resolves #include <winkle.h> and replaces it with tokens.

The subsequent processing is what my position is concerned with.

My position is that since the standard doesn't define what those tokens are, the behavior is not defined.

In other words, a conforming implementation can respond #include <winkle.h> with any behavior whatsoever.

- It can diagnose it as not being found.

- It can replace it with the token __wipe_current_directory which that same implementation then understands as a compile-time instruction to wipe the current direcctory.

- Or any other possibility at all.

This all has to do with the fact that the header is not required to exist, but may exist, and if it does exit, it may have any contents whatsoever, including non-portable contents which that implementation understands which do weird things.

It is not required to document any of it, but if it does, that constitutes a documented extension.

A conforming implementation can support a program like this:

#include <pascal.h> program HelloWorld; begin WriteLn('Hello, World!'); end.

All that <pascal.h> has to do is regurgitate a token like __pascal_mode. This token is procesed by translation phase 7, which tells the implementation to start parsing Pascal, as an extension.
by aidenn0 | 2025-08-14 03:53:30+00:00
No love for the "implementation in a .h file that you include multiple times" approach?

e.g.

#define GENERIC_VECTOR_TYPE struct foo #define GENERIC_VECTOR_NAME struct_foo #include <generic_vector.h>

It's possible to make include guards that prevent it from being included multiple times with the same name, and it prevents having function definitions being inside macro expansions.
by eru | 2025-08-14 03:53:52+00:00
Turbine generators are a pretty late development (invented in 1884 for propulsion, not electricity generation).

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electricity#Cultural_perceptio...

> It is said that in the 1850s, British politician William Ewart Gladstone asked the scientist Michael Faraday why electricity was valuable. Faraday answered, "One day sir, you may tax it."

That admittedly apocryphal anecdote is set 30 years before the turbine you mentioned was invented.
by mindwok | 2025-08-14 03:54:15+00:00
This isn't a technology problem. Technology can help accessibility, but fundamentally this is an on-the-ground, social coordination problem.

Functioning, welcoming, and well-ran communities are the only thing that solves this. Unfortunately, technology often makes this worse, because it creates such a convenient alternative and also creates a paradox of choice. I.e. people think "when there's 1000 meetups to check out, and this one isn't perfect, I'll just move onto the next one" when actually it's the act of commitment that makes a community good.
by politician | 2025-08-14 03:54:16+00:00
> Banks suck so goddamn hard and are allowed to operate without any real competition and don't innovate at all.

It's not really the banks' fault. They're all stuck leasing expensive information systems from entrenched third-party technology shops. They don't have software development dollars and they are extremely risk averse, to a paranoid degree. Thank the regulatory environment for that (state and federal).

Companies like Moov.io are trying to crack open this space and provide the levels of integration we see in other industries.

But it's really hard and slow.
by Dylan16807 | 2025-08-14 03:55:03+00:00
> And there it is. Yes, PCI-E 3.0 from 2010, 15 years ago, involves 4 GHz wire level signals. A 4x PCI-E connector has four differential pairs of this, not cross-talking, not violating EMC limits, etc.

Well this board does have a lane. And that's within spitting distance of USB 3 which has some pretty cheap implementations. Entire USB 3 hubs cost $2.
by Pfhortune | 2025-08-14 03:55:10+00:00
> Garmin's UX is also very disjointed between devices for how expensive they are.

Yeah... I bought an Instinct 2S hoping it would scratch the same itch as Pebble, but the UX is really awful.

The Pebble OS UX is really something special because it's so... obviously correct. Vertical menus just a few layers deep. You can set shortcuts on long-press but they aren't required to do the basic functions. It boggles my mind that Garmin cannot make an interface that doesn't require a lot of memorization in remembering all the right buttons to press/hold.
by BrenBarn | 2025-08-14 03:55:19+00:00
It makes sense, but the danger can come when non-paying users unwittingly become dependent on a service that is subsidized by paying customers. What you're describing could make sense if pyx is only private, but what if there is some kind of free-to-use pyx server that people start using? They may not realize they're building on sand until the VC investors start tightening the screws and insist you stop wasting money by providing the free service.

(Even with an entirely private setup, there is the risk that it will encourage too much developer attention to shift to working within that silo and thus starve the non-paying community of support, although I think this risk is less, given Python's enormous breadth of usage across communities of various levels of monetization.)
by giancarlostoro | 2025-08-14 03:56:13+00:00
I had issues on Mac, Windows and Linux... It was obnoxious. It led me to adopt a very simple rule: if I cannot get your framework / programming language up and running in under 10 minutes (barring compilation time / download speeds) I am not going to use your tools / language. I shouldn't be struggling with the most basic of hello worlds with your language / framework. I don't in like 100% of the other languages I already use, why should I struggle to use a new language?
by UltraSane | 2025-08-14 03:56:42+00:00
This concerned me greatly so I use AWS Route53 for DNS and use an IAM policy that only allows the key to work from specific IP addresses and limit it to only create and delete TXT records for a specific record set. I love when I can create exactly the permissions I want.

AWS IAM can be a huge pain but it can also solve a lot of problems.

https://docs.aws.amazon.com/IAM/latest/UserGuide/reference_p...

https://repost.aws/questions/QU-HJgT3V0TzSlizZ7rVT4mQ/how-do...

https://docs.aws.amazon.com/Route53/latest/DeveloperGuide/sp...
by hnaccount_rng | 2025-08-14 03:57:30+00:00
Then you have ignored the majority of the event. Don’t get me wrong, I’m also there for the technical talks or at least tech-related talks. But most of the tracks aren’t that.

And I would say at least 50% of the assemblies and Co are political. The Sea Watch people, the ones who are regularly detained by Italian authorities have their home base there.

The CCC, as an organisation, always has been a political organisation first. I wouldn’t call them a particularly successful one. But they are the opposite of agnostic or worse apolitical
by qwertox | 2025-08-14 03:57:51+00:00
What I take from this is, that if a .eu domain, or one of any TLD of an EU country has not page with real usage on it, that I then I can demand to have it cancelled and given the right to register it.

Should be the same, no? And if it's not, why didn't OP get the right to sell the trademark to that company?

Not sure if it's ok or not, what the TM office did there, because if not, then just registering TMs could also be done in the same way like domain squatting.

Maybe OP should find cases where such demands from powerful companies were rejected, even if they shouldn't have rejected them.
Ask HN: How to Learn to Solve Exercises?
by shivajikobardan | 2025-08-14 03:58:08+00:00
http://contents2.kocw.or.kr/KOCW/document/2013/soongsil/kimbyounggi1031/7.pdf

Go to the page number 4 of this slide.

I know how pencil and paper multiplication algorithm works.

However, I kept thinking but could not come up with a circuit for it(array multiplier circuit). Because I could not "idk what to say" it.

This has happened to me a lot. I study with a textbook and laptop and sometimes I suspect that usage of laptop is causing loose focus leading to these issues. However, I am not sure.

I'd be glad to get any help here.
by kccoder | 2025-08-14 03:59:06+00:00
No, start considering the source. If a mental patient tells you that a stock is a good investment, do you buy? No, so why listen to a man who lies with every word he speaks?

If Kamala had been elected president the debt would've grown, but at a lower rate than under Trump, and her policies would've benefited regular folk, not just gazillionaires.

Kamala also isn't in the Epstein files and doesn't have a history of sexual assault, and certainly wouldn't have moved that absolute demon Ghislaine Maxwell to a minimum security club fed because she was willing to provide testimony to deflect from Kamala's crimes (of which there are none).

Shall I go on?

You chose one of the most incompetent, nonsensical, unethical, greedy, lecherous humans on this planet, who also has an absolute lack of morals or empathy, because he said he'd reduce the deficit / debt? What did you think was going to happen?

I hope you take this misstep as an opportunity for self reflection.
by abxyz | 2025-08-14 03:59:08+00:00
A lot of (talented people in a field) are idiots / irrational in other parts of their life. A very talented engineer with options may buy in to Elon’s public vision (which sounds good on the surface) and may be completely incapable of recognizing when someone is betraying their vision. Very smart people get caught up in nonsense all the time.
by windowshopping | 2025-08-14 03:59:39+00:00
Sure! Number 1 is, as you said, exercise. If I can't get myself to do a full routine, I reduce it to "just go do bench press for today. nothing else." Because doing a bench press set beats not exercising at all!

Likewise I found getting myself to run a mile regularly was not happening. So I reduced it to running half a mile. That's pretty doable. That's 5 minutes of effort.

I do it with my coding projects. If I can't bring myself to really seriously spend hours progressing on my code, I'll do the absolute bare minimum just to move the needle forward a millimeter - write a boilerplate react component template that isn't much more than a div with the right class on it, or write the skeleton for an endpoint (like its function signature) but none of the actual logic, or simply write out a quick pseudocode of the steps for what i need to do the next time i work on it.

I do it with chores. Can't get myself to do laundry? Ok, instead just move the laundry to be sitting next to the basement door. Next time I go down for something else, I just take it with me and stick it in the machine since it was already right there. Same with dishes - don't want to do all of them - ok, just load the plates for now and leave the rest for later.

I do it with mail that requires a response, like bills. Don't want to go through all of them? Just do the one on top and do another tomorrow. (I don't get enough mail that it piles up faster than I can keep up with.)

I do it with guitar. Don't want to practice for half an hour? Okay, just do chord switching for 3 or 4 minutes.

When I describe it all this way, it makes me sound like someone who barely gets anything done, but the reality is I actually get A LOT done because of these tricks. Once I'm playing guitar for 3 minutes it usually becomes 30. Once I pseudocode a function I usually just write the whole thing. Once I put away the plates I usually just clear the whole sink. And if it gets put off for a day, that's fine. It's all about tricking myself into being disciplined.
by giancarlostoro | 2025-08-14 03:59:51+00:00
NuGet for C# has always been fantastic, and I like Cargo, though sometimes waiting for freaking ever for things to build does kill me on the inside a little bit. I do wish Go had a better package manager trajectory, I can only hope they continue to work on it, there were a few years I refused to work on any Go projects because setup was a nightmare.
by nvbalaji | 2025-08-14 04:02:20+00:00
>>You can safely ignore them if they don’t fit your workflows at the moment

I would rather qualify this statement a bit more - I would say "you can safely ignore if you are not building anything green field or build tools for self". In my experiments in the last one month or so, it is very efficient for building new components (small & medium). Making it efficient for the existing code base is a bit more tricky - you need to make sure it adheres to the way things are coded already, not to leak .env contents to LLMs, building a context from the existing components so that it does not read code every time (leading to cost and time escalations) and so on.

My main issue so far has been understanding the code that is generated. As of now that is the biggest bottleneck in increasing the productivity - i.e it takes a long time to review the code and push. In usual workflow of building, normally by the time the code complexity has increased in the system I would have sufficient mental construction to handle that complexity. I would know the inner workings of code. However if AI generates large piece of code getting into that code is taking a long time
by lemming | 2025-08-14 04:02:27+00:00
Fortunately we don't have to rely on your anecdata, people actually study this stuff:

https://news.gallup.com/poll/467792/social-media-users-incli...

U.S. adults commonly engage with popular social media platforms but are more inclined to browse content on those websites and apps than to post their own content to them. The vast majority of those who say they use these platforms have accounts with them, but less than half who have accounts -- and even smaller proportions of all U.S. adults -- post their own content.

https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2019/04/24/sizing-up-tw...

Most users rarely tweet, but the most prolific 10% create 80% of tweets from adult U.S. users

https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2021/11/15/the-behavior...

The analysis also reveals another familiar pattern on social media: that a relatively small share of highly active users produce the vast majority of content.
by kelseyfrog | 2025-08-14 04:03:26+00:00
In high school circa 2000, one of us put QNX on a floppy so we could bypass the school library's content filter. The library computers at the time still had floppy drives and would boot from them if a disk was present so we just inserted the disk and power-cycled the machine.

It was fun, but eventually we got funny looks from the staff when they walked by and I believe we were eventually asked to stop "whatever it was we were doing."
by martin-t | 2025-08-14 04:03:52+00:00
> It misses the forest for the trees.

Yes, this is something I can agree with - many people are aware of societal issues in the small (abusive people they interact with personally, specific instances of injustice which affect them personally) but are unable or unwilling to see the bigger picture and that those instances are just the result of how the system is setup and allowed to exist.

> to suggest that any one person might have ownership over the specific combination of ingredients ... patently absurd.

I don't think that's what the author is trying to say. How I understand it (and my view as well) is that LLM take "content" from multiple people and mix it together in a way which erases authorship. As a result 1) any individuality is lost 2) the formerly human to human interaction is now replaced by both humans interacting with a middleman and at least one of them not consensually.

My addition: on top of that the middleman expects to get paid, despite not doing any original work and despite harming the people whose "content" it reproduces. And that is parasitic behavior.

> I can run an open model on my local machine and have it synthesize for me at whim without big corpo in the equation at all.

Yes, that removes the parasitic middleman but not the issue that other people's work is being plagiarized and/or used in a way that never consented to. For example, I published a bunch of code under GPL or AGPL because I want my users to have the right to inspect and modify the code and more importantly, I want that right to extend to anything build on top of that work. A byproduct is that the copyleft licenses seem to be considered toxic by many corporations so they won't touch it with a ten foot pole and won't make money off my free work.

> Stated somewhat ungenerously, it's not "for people", it's "for ME to decide who it's for."

And I don't think there's anything wrong with either approach. Specifically, the second extends to everyone. If I get to decide how others can use my work, others get the same right and we all benefit in return. Cooperation should be based on mutual agreement, not be forced.

Even if somebody found a cure for all the cancers, I don't think society has any right to take it from them or force them to publish it. Instead, if society at large wants it that much, it should offer sufficient reward so that both sides come to an agreement.
by anonym29 | 2025-08-14 04:03:59+00:00
The original claim, which my message was trying to substantiate towards the post I was replying to that expressed confusion at the , was the idea that American culture has shifted hard to the left, which is not the same as saying that the American government or political system has necessarily shifted hard to the left. To the contrary, I attempted to clearly distinguish this in my post by noting that all three branches of government in the US have indeed been moving to the political right in the last decade or so, even has the wider culture did appear to be shifting towards the left for much of that time period.

You'd be forgiven for thinking that the mainstream cultural values of the US should have set the political preference for the US government in what is nominally supposed to be a "democratic" country - that entirely logical and rational assumption increasingly appears to be false.

As weird as it might sound, I think the "live and let live" thing is actually quite sociologically interesting - it seems to present a framework rooted in individualism that achieves social tolerance outcomes comparable to China's ideas around "social harmony" (which I admittedly am far from an expert on). Perhaps it's just a rehashing of "the golden rule" wearing a cowboy hat, but as someone who leans towards what Europeans would call classical liberalism, it's hard for me to not appreciate the parallels with the "non-aggression principle", as well.

And for what it's worth, I harbor no ill will towards anyone from any political background or perspective, even the purists. I'm fond of the idea of treating everyone with dignity, kindness, and compassion, even when I disagree with their ideas or would criticize their actions.
by nerdponx | 2025-08-14 04:04:39+00:00
There are a bunch of problems with PyPI. For example, there's no metadata API, you have to actually fetch each wheel file and inspect it to figure out certain things about the packages you're trying to resolve/install.

It would be nice if they contributed improvements upstream, but then they can't capture revenue from doing it. I guess it's better to have an alternative and improved PyPI, than to have no improvements and a sense of pride.

There is a lot of other stuff going on with Pyx, but "uv-native metadata APIs" is the relevant one for this example.
by giancarlostoro | 2025-08-14 04:04:42+00:00
They call it spaces, so when you create a "Space" on Desktop at least, you look on the right hand corner for the three dots, next to the Share button, and click "Settings":

> Give instructions to Perplexity to customize how answers are focused and structured.

You type into that box, now every space you make can have a fully custom "pre-prompt" as I call it.

I only just started using Perplexity, they really need to rework their UI a little bit.
by antisol | 2025-08-14 04:05:07+00:00
> i don't think i can do better than the LLM.

I'd just like to point out just how sad, self-defeating, and ignorant this statement is.

I could literally teach a below-average-intelligence 16-year-old how to write better code than any LLM I've ever seen - if they're interested and willing to learn.