MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by LeifCarrotson | 2025-08-27 16:02:16+00:00
The report actually says it could have landed. A week later, another F35 at the same base had the same problem, it landed with its nose gear 6 degrees off center and the pilot barely noticed.

Basically, Lockheed Martin engineers told the air force to attempt re-centering with touch-and-go landings, but didn't realize that this could mess with the weight-on-wheels sensors and cause it to switch flight modes.
by sfink | 2025-08-27 16:02:48+00:00
I think something like cargo vet is the way forward: https://mozilla.github.io/cargo-vet/

Yes, it's a ton of overhead, and an equivalent will be needed for every language ecosystem.

The internet was great too, before it became too monetizable. So was email -- I have fond memories of cold-emailing random professors about their papers or whatever, and getting detailed responses back. Spam killed that one. Dependency chains are the latest victim of human nature. This is why we can't have nice things.
by GMoromisato | 2025-08-27 16:02:53+00:00
Starship is like AI/LLMs in that success would revolutionize the world, but technological failure is very possible. And despite the confident predictions on the internets, we don't know which it's going to be.

After the Shuttle program ended in failure, work on reusable launch systems stopped for decades. A similar thing would happen if Starship fails. Space would remain the province of the military and large governments.

Today it costs ~$3,000 per kilogram to put something in orbit (on a SpaceX Falcon 9). Starship aims to lower that to $10 per kg. That's totally crazy, but even if it could get it down to $300 per kg, that would revolutionize access to space.

Data centers in space, biotech manufacturing, and maybe even asteroid mining and energy generation become practical at those prices. To say nothing of telecommunications, remote sensing, and global navigation--all become much cheaper.

And, of course, that drops the price on all the cool science/exploration goals that we always talk about: massive space telescopes, regular probes to all the planets, and crewed exploration.

We're literally at an inflexion point between two possible futures and we don't know which it's going to be. If I were younger I would absolutely try to work at SpaceX to help tilt the chances.

But as it is, all I can do is root for them.
by lenerdenator | 2025-08-27 16:03:09+00:00
Someone else mentioned that the kids (what, with their damned loud k-pop music and Tok cloks) are used to using Chromebooks that autosave documents.

Also, MS wants more sales opportunities. If data is on their cloud, they have at least some control over your access of it, and the ease with which it is used in your daily work. It's a pain in the ass to have to manually save stuff, but that's what you'll have to do once you exceed the 5GB free tier limit. I guess you'll probably want to shell out for more space, no?

The good news for your work Mac is that it's your IT and budget departments' headaches, not yours.
by Insanity | 2025-08-27 16:03:19+00:00
.. and subsequently used to train an AI?

I don't use Microsoft software other than for playing the occasional games, this is a good reminder of _why_ I don't. Other than Windows being a hot mess of an operating system half the time, multiple different UI's that don't mesh together, ads being pushed in the start menu, and somehow more hardware problems than I run into on Linux these days.
by cruffle_duffle | 2025-08-27 16:03:30+00:00
There are surprisingly few YouTubers down in the sewers but if you look you’ll find them.

The best is some guy in Czechia who routinely explores the vast trunk sewers under Brno, Prague and others. Often times he will visit during a rain storm and watch the combined sewer overflows do their thing. It gets pretty wild down there!

Up until about a year ago it was all in Czech but recently he has been adding English subtitles as well, which are very informative. The dude clearly does a lot of homework before visiting.

Examples: https://youtu.be/GQtzYgH8buc?si=IldzL7KEEhdObjtJ

https://youtu.be/ZUwXZbkEXWE?si=UmzGMbHXSQAt6hjx

And one of my personal favorites is this absolutely massive CSO which somehow has a plaque memorializing some civil engineer on one of the walls: https://youtu.be/5LVlj-6qwZU?si=lwMdKgVrA7BRuvt2

I highly recommend browsing the channel because there are plenty of videos of him exploring deep sewer tunnels and stuff. Channel: https://youtube.com/@kanalismus35

The other guy I’ll watch goes under London. Not nearly as much content but the “artisan brickwork” down in older London sewers cannot be beat.

https://youtube.com/@valdigger

You’ll occasionally find videos of people going into storm drains and tunnels but those aren’t nearly as interesting in my opinion.
by suggestion | 2025-08-27 16:04:13+00:00
I'm using the definition of the threshold necessary for a clinical diagnosis as defined in psychiatry, which is not merely "negative effects" or as I've repeatedly stated "discomfort".

It's something that persistently prevents someone from living a "normal" life, which is also defined far too narrowly.

You're absolutely insistent that virtually any amount of "negative effects" is sufficient for diagnosis and pharmacological intervention which is absolutely not the case.

Nobody is saying it's easy or the discomfort and difficulties aren't real.
by jbreckmckye | 2025-08-27 16:04:36+00:00
It might not be a paradox: Bubbles are most likely to occur when something is plausibly valuable.

If GenAI really was just a "glorified autocorrect", a "stochastic parrot", etc, it would be much easier to deflate AI Booster claims and contextualise what it is and isn't good at.

Instead, LLMs exist in a blurry space where they are sometimes genuinely decent, occasionally completely broken, and often subtly wrong in ways not obvious to their users. That uncertainty is what breeds FOMO and hype in the investor class.
by littlestymaar | 2025-08-27 16:05:09+00:00
I don't know hat makes you think I'm talking about disagreement, but that's not what I'm talking about, if one cannot help insulting people on a forum, then what they deserve is a ban. First a temporary one, then if they still can't behave then a permanent one.

Loris is a bully, that's the problem, not his opinions.
by gregoriol | 2025-08-27 16:05:21+00:00
The pilot could eject at mostly any time, not if the plane starts spinning uncontrollably though. Also, the plane can become very dangerous to what may be on the ground: if the pilot looses control and must eject it may not always be in a safe place to crash. Or even worse, the plane may continue to fly some distance and crash at a very different place than expected. So yeah, very stressful for everyone involved.
by 1718627440 | 2025-08-27 16:05:44+00:00
What about this?

unsigned retry_count = 5; do { err = action (); } while (err && is_transient_error (err) && retry_count-- && (sleep (), TRUE)) return err;

We want to loop while there is still an error, the error is still transient, we still haven't retried enough and after we have slept. Pretty straightforward translation of natural language to code.
by nilstycho | 2025-08-27 16:06:09+00:00
> Second, Starship is much more expensive for each launch attempt than Falcon 9 ever was.

The launch cost of a Starship today is high, especially if you include development costs, but Musk's goal is a marginal launch cost of ~$1M. A Falcon 9's launch price is ~$70M; Musk claims a "best case" marginal Falcon 9 launch costs ~$15M.
by Sesse__ | 2025-08-27 16:06:53+00:00
> You certainly can build slow apps with React, it doesn't make building slow things that hard.

By all means. It sometimes feels like React is more the symptom than the actual issue, though.

Personally I generally just like having less code; generally makes for fewer footguns. But that's an incredibly hard sell in general (and of course not the entire story).
by mchusma | 2025-08-27 16:06:53+00:00
Love it, great job SpaceX!

I watched the Martian again the other day and I marveled about how much has changed. With Starship progress, almost none of the plot really makes sense (bespoke vehicles and payloads etc). The first mars expeditions will probably be stocked with a thousand tons of gear, enough to easily last a guy 5 years. And if some dude were stranded on Mars, SpaceX could start lobbing things in his direction within maybe 30 days?

The Martian is a vision for a 2035 mission from 2011. We seem likely to beat that!
by jfengel | 2025-08-27 16:07:00+00:00
You're talking about the movies, and yeah, that has failed. They're talking about yet another one, and I'm baffled, but we'll see where (if anywhere) it goes.

But the Paramount+ stuff is doing pretty well. Strange New Worlds is very popular. So was Lower Decks. The last season of Picard, at least, gave fans a lot of what they had been looking for. They've got a new series coming out, and what little we know is that it has a bang-up cast. (Not that that's sufficient; Discovery did very badly by some very talented actors. But it's a good start.)

So Trek: The IP is still going pretty strong. At least as well as Star Wars, which has also been hit-and-miss.
by orblivion | 2025-08-27 16:07:03+00:00
As for setting things up multiple times - you can install stuff in the "Template VM" which is where the OS goes. Every "App VM" mostly just has files in their own ~/. Any changes an App VM makes to its system files won't affect other VMs, or even survive a restart. There are "playbooks" with Salt but I never figured that stuff out. If you pass around some setup scripts instead, that's an attack vector, but I don't think drive-by attacks like the OP would target something sophisticated like that yet.
by koverstreet | 2025-08-27 16:07:29+00:00
A lot of people draw the wrong conclusions from Therac-25 today; becoming overly process driven can become a huge problem for software quality, because the processes have to be the right processes, and once processes are in place people have a natural tendency to defer to them and suspend their own judgement.

That gets actively dangerous; a lot of more recent safety mishaps are more of the variety of "processes were followed, but things went hilariously off the rails and no one noticed and spoke up".

Culture and expertise matter just as much if not more, especially today now that we all (in theory) should understand source control, testing, safer languages, etc.

I think Admiral Rickover's methods apply just as much today, and applying that kind of thinking would fill major gaps in a lot of organizations - he emphasized good communication, a sense of responsibility, and thinking on your feet, and his safety record is unmatched.

I think aviation also approaches process a bit better - by having much of it be more informal, less rigid checklists, it doesn't encourage people to suspend judgement so much.

There's also the Tankship Tromedy, which really emphasizes the engineering legwork of just chasing down, understanding and fixing every last failure mode you can find.

https://www.dieselduck.info/library/08%20policies/2006%20The...
by drdec | 2025-08-27 16:07:46+00:00
> For now, there exists no evidence whatsoever that the physical space and time are not infinitely divisible.

What is your evidence for it? You want to make a claim about something being infinite, it is up to you to provide evidence.

> recognizing that zero times infinity can be any number and also zero or infinity.

This statement makes no sense in formal mathematics. Multiplication is a function, which means for each set of inputs there is one output. I imagine you are trying to say something about limits here, but the language you are using is very imprecise.
by cjbgkagh | 2025-08-27 16:08:04+00:00
Just got back from an In-Person conference, as a vendor the cost was $8K, up from $6K for the same thing last year so a 30% YoY increase. The $6K last year already felt like we were being gouged. I may end up cutting back and going every second year. For 3 days if we rented a 30" screen and a stand it would have cost $2.2K and $350 respectively - I brought my own monitor and stand. Other vendors buy monitors each year and donate it to charity and there is a charity rep that goes around collecting monitors and other 'single use' items. It was a very large conference and I understand the need for an actual hotel / conference venue but the hotel costs were rough as were the built in food / drink options. Since these are often a bit out of town we have to get Ubers to leave and that costs at least $20 each way. I think next year we'll go grocery shopping first thing and avoid the restaurants. Vendors are expected to shout a round or two at the end of the day at the hotel bar. Simple cocktails like an Old-Fashioned were $25. It's likely that the conference will still be a net-positive for us but we're hearing a lot of other vendors complain about the costs and suggest that they too will switch to alternate years.
by dmbche | 2025-08-27 16:08:06+00:00
False dichotomy - the mission profile dictates the refuelling station and all that, but it never was the only option. Somehow we've decided we needed to be able to do lots of trips to the moon for Artemis, but it's not clear to me that it's such a precious golden oportunity and warrants this spending/impact on the environnenent.

We didn't get to the moon with a refuelling station did we? How come we need one now? We're really seeing 15 starship launches per moon trip as reasonable, rather than just building a single trip program?

The mission itself is nonsensical. The problems are stemming from the SLS, I'll find a link to a relevant source.
by SpicyLemonZest | 2025-08-27 16:08:47+00:00
Sure! Like I said, I have no interest in launching an inquisition, I'm not going to demand a detailed political history from everyone I meet in 2030 or 2040. They can reintegrate by treating their support for the Trump regime as the shameful, dark secret it is, or by strategically "forgetting" that they ever supported it at all.

I suspect that quite a lot of Trump supporters will not be interested in doing this, and will instead maintain a permanent state of tension by declaring their continued support of a regime that hated me. That's not great, I agree, but if there's one thing the 2024 election taught me it's that pretending it's OK doesn't defuse the tension. The Republican party had a clear opportunity to let the past go and win with a candidate who doesn't hate me - a candidate I would have voted for! - but they decided they prefer not to.
by kmeisthax | 2025-08-27 16:09:23+00:00
Between this and Google announcing their move to a similar system for controlling third-party Android developers, I feel like FAANG is declaring itself above the law.

Apple's prior approach to DMA compliance was to loudly grumble about it, but do the absolute bare minimum to kinda sorta comply if you squint at it. The whole idea with iOS notarization was that Apple was ceding control over iOS apps for editorial but not technical reasons; i.e. that they'd only ever refuse to sign an app because it broke iOS, used private APIs, or was literal malware. Not because they didn't like it. This scheme is already kind of dubious, if OAMA had passed it would definitely be illegal in the US, but I'm told EU regulators enforce the law differently than in the US[0].

Now Google wants to adopt the same system Apple has just proven doesn't work. I hope the EU regulators are not only listening, but willing to actually fight this. The related debacle of digital services taxes would indicate that the EU is spineless enough that Apple thinks the DMA is already unenforceable enough to start killing apps they don't like.

[0] US regulation is something like "if we say jump, each foot must leave the ground for at least 0.8 seconds and clear at least 20cm off the ground", and then people figure out you can just lift one foot at a time and still comply. EU regulation is more like "if we say jump, you must jump", and then the regulators decide whether or not you made a good-faith attempt at jumping. So no stupid loopholes like lifting one foot at a time, but the regulators can be very subjective as to if you jumped high enough or not.
by ActorNightly | 2025-08-27 16:09:56+00:00
>What if he’s not an idiot?

Lets evaluate that claim, by first defining what an idiot is, and then looking at his history, all the things he said, and all the things he has done.

Ill skip you the trouble of going through that process - he is very much an idiot.

Don't confuse the ability to throw money at something and make it work through sheer cash burn with actual intelligence.
by 0xffff2 | 2025-08-27 16:10:08+00:00
Fun trivia fact of the day: BO was founded 2 years _before_ SpaceX. 25 years later, SpaceX has revolutionized the launch industry. Meanwhile, BO has only just had their first (and only) orbital launch at the beginning of this year. It's unclear to me what, if anything BO could do to really catch up at this point.

It's clear that money isn't the defining factor at least. When BO was founded Bezos was the richest man in the world. It has floundered for so long that Musk was able to build up a cult of personality around SpaceX and parlay that into even more money than Bezos.
by maerch | 2025-08-27 16:10:54+00:00
I’m really trying to understand your point, so please bear with me.

As I see it, this prompt is essentially an "executable script". In your view, should all prompts be analyzed and possibly blocked based on heuristics that flag malicious intent? Should we also prevent the LLM from simply writing an equivalent script in a programming language, even if it is never executed? How is this different from requiring all programming languages (at least from big companies with big engineering teams) to include such security checks before code is compiled?
by lxe | 2025-08-27 16:12:57+00:00
This reminds me of a time when 'API' has become a hot term. Every company would ship an API. I think Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, Reddit, and I think even Google at some point had nice public APIs. This was the era of RSS and semantic web as well... until most realized there's no easy way to serve ads or control UX, making APIs great for customers but bad for business (unless the API is your product of course)

Given this, I'm not sure what business purpose there is to ship an MCP API like this, aside from goodwill and exposure.
by ndiddy | 2025-08-27 16:13:19+00:00
Apple officially supported C for Macintosh application development even back when they were still making devs do all their work on Lisas (see http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/apple/lisa/workshop_3.0/Lisa_Wo...), but you're right that they were a majority Pascal shop until they shifted to C++ around when System 7 came out.
by csa | 2025-08-27 16:13:27+00:00
> But T is not the answer long term.

Imho, “T” only has enough gas in the tank to enrich himself and his family by any means necessary while protecting the same group from legal consequences.

The real question is whether p2025 is the answer. The deafening indifference to p2025 makes me think that this is the direction we will be moving for a while — likely past 2028 if an opposition party does not create a compelling and unified response.
by stetrain | 2025-08-27 16:13:30+00:00
The Apollo missions landed two crew members in a tin can with extreme limits on what weight they could bring with them in either direction.

A single trip launch will always be constrained like this due to the tyranny of the rocket equation.

A modular mission system with multiple launches is the best way to expand capabilities and enable things like landing larger payloads for more advanced or long-term missions.
by gloosx | 2025-08-27 16:13:47+00:00
Slack is one the most slick and pleasant pieces of software to use. It's big success as well as the fact that it's acquisition cost was one of the largest software deals ever – tells of itself – it's certainly a fine piece of software made by fine engineers who used react and electron with a certain amount of dignity. People who rant about tools like react or electron affecting their performance just don't want to understand that it's organisation and people behind the tools who are responsible for their performance.
by jbreckmckye | 2025-08-27 16:14:03+00:00
Data point of two, but this podcast also recently floated 2027 as the crunch point: https://youtu.be/vp1-3Ypmr1Y?si=p4GlyPwZRWOkxFtt

In my uninformed opinion, though, companies who spent excessively on bad AI initiatives will begin to introspect as the fiscal year comes to an end. By summer 2026 I think a lot of execs will be getting antsy if they can't defend their investments
by jchw | 2025-08-27 16:14:05+00:00
For as long as I've been on Hacker News (2015?) there has been an obvious Apple bias. I don't really think that has changed that much.

I always thought a lot of developers who were big Apple fans would fall off as Apple started pushing stuff like the Mac App Store and Gatekeeper on macOS, but no. At this point I am unsure there is much Apple could do to lose support of its biggest supporters. All Apple needs is some plausible excuse for why something is a good idea and people take it largely at face value. (At least, Apple never really seems to lose much supporters in the long run.)

I pay too much attention to comment votes and replies on this website, probably mainly because all of the other discussion forums I used to go on are dead. But in threads about Apple, I kind of get the idea of what the votes really represent.
by dragonwriter | 2025-08-27 16:14:10+00:00
“They” has, in fact, been popular for gender neutral singular use since before the Latin-inspired prescriptivist movement and its attempts to install as “correct” various things that were previously either not dominant or in some cases entirely foreign to English; that movement's influence had actually been fading on that usage and in general for decades even before concerns about sexism in language became significant; singular “they” is no more incorrect than the now-so-universal-most-have-forgotten-the-actual-singular use of the second-person plural when the semantics are in fact singular.
by positron26 | 2025-08-27 16:14:10+00:00
Look, they said this about us using Google. Oh no. The Dewey Decibel System [sic]

And then twenty years later, I'm pretty convinced that the online siloing has worn us down. A lot of us. But the problems that came weren't what the reactionaries were going on about. It never is.

It's been ten years since my friend and I were saying as I was walking out the door, "This whole internet thing, let just.." "...yeah, let's turn it off." There was profound sense of optimism in the early internet. We saw it together, and we knew it hadn't worked out, that it was stabilizing onto a kind of bad trajectory.

I still don't think the optimism was wrong. I think we're in some kind of perverse equilibrium where there are dams exist that, if they did not, would lead to some wildly different world rushing in, like what if you came to realize one day that 9/11 and all its self-inflicted after-effects never happened levels of mass self-transformation.

Someone else brought up surveillance economy, and that's really relevant here and to what I'm doing. I think the ad-economy alone has a lot of perverse incentive that has basically destroyed journalism and the meaning of credibility for now. But the idea of the surveillance economy is right about how the pieces fit together like cursed legos. We have content that is addictive but not entertaining being used to serve us ads for things we don't need.

It's not just that we need to commercialize open source if it will ever reach mass market. We have to better monetize independent media for its goodness and coherence with reality or we're never going to have a shared set of facts in our social consciousness again.