MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by Guid_NewGuid | 2025-08-20 14:33:16+00:00
While the site is pseudonymous and that's a good thing, making flagging data public would still allow analysis on why exactly flagging seems to be so aggressive. E.g. are these all accounts who flag the same stories? Are they accounts in 'good-standing'? Etc.

We have dang's word that he hasn't detected any funky behavior with respect to flagging and that these are organic events. But I don't see a reason that the information shouldn't be available. I struggle to think of a downside.

Not really relevant to your main point but the idea there aren't social media influence campaigns from all sides is more of a tinfoil position than acknowledging that there absolutely are, whether or not they are effective.
by AllegedAlec | 2025-08-20 14:33:27+00:00
Insecure by default. I remember in the previous place I worked we used ASP webforms. One of the major headaches I had to deal with is that by default, microsoft allows all users to view a page. I had to create huge scripts to go through the entire pagetree and check each's one's rights (moving up directories also because of course we also have cascading positive and negative rights), and output the results in the audits we did automagically each week.

One of the major issues was we could never properly secure the main page, because of some fuckery. At the main page we'd redirect to the login if you weren't logged in, but that was basically after you'd already gone through the page access validation checks, so when I tried to secure that page you wouldn't be redirected. I can't remember how, or even if I solved this...
Show HN: MergeBetter – Proactive conflict detection for pull requests
by allday | 2025-08-20 14:33:49+00:00
Hey HN,

I got tired of merge conflicts cropping up on my open PRs, so I built MergeBetter - a GitHub App that warns you before conflicts happen.

What it does:

Watches your team’s open PRs and detects when two branches touch the same files/lines in potentially conflicting ways.

Posts a single, tidy PR comment with the overlap and links.

No CI setup or YAML needed. Just install the GitHub App, pick repos, done.

Code never leaves GitHub. We only read PR diffs, never store source.

Why:

Even with good branch hygiene, people still step on each other’s toes. If two engineers are changing the same code at the same time, that’s probably a conversation worth having sooner rather than later. MergeBetter makes that conversation happen earlier, when it’s cheap.

Details:

Works with org or personal repos. You can install it in “selected repositories” if you want to trial safely.

It’s polite: fewer API calls, caches results, and updates one comment instead of spamming.

14-day free trial, then pricing is based on active members (not repos or PR count).

Security/privacy page is up; happy to answer questions.

Roadmap:

More granular hotspot analytics: see where conflicts cluster over time within files.

Smarter descriptions of conflicts.

GitHub Marketplace listing (currently billing via Stripe).

If you try it:

Install the GitHub App (takes ~1 min), push a PR or two, and let me know what breaks or annoys you. Feature requests, bug reports, and roasts are all welcome.

I’ll be around in the comments today.
by dvdkon | 2025-08-20 14:34:29+00:00
This looks nice. While I don't think tile download and decoding is a bottleneck for web maps, the efficient in-memory representation might help elsewhere as well.

Maybe someone here will know: What is MapLibre GL JS' current in-memory representation like? I know Tangram JS decodes MVT tiles to GeoJSON, but only because it showed up on a memory profiler :)
by pidgeon_lover | 2025-08-20 14:34:51+00:00
Central repositories and package managers are the reason I avoid Linux - I like to keep offline backups of old software. This is extremely difficult on Linux and you have to trust the package managers to keep your software available. I do not trust them to do so, and have faced countless issues at work with package deprecation on industrial Linux boxes. I end up having to manually search for and archive a million DEBs, which I can then manually install, and it ends up just being a very messy and time consuming way of approximating a fraction of Windows/Mac/Android's power.
by yladiz | 2025-08-20 14:35:18+00:00
I'm starting to learn more about RGAs and CRDTs in general, so I'm not sure if this makes sense, but when you say replacing the sequence number for the "right parent" (`originRight` in your code?), so you mean replacing the Lamport timestamp for the node/operation with a pointer to the element adjacent to the right, correct? One alternative way to approach it that comes to mind is to introduce transaction semantics so that you can consider a node to be identified by a [Lamport timestamp, site ID, transaction sequence] and the parent, and use a sequence number within the transaction to sort, but it seems like it would add additional data and complexity compared to the "right parent" approach, so it might not be ideal, and may fall victim to the same downside as the original RGA.
by chasil | 2025-08-20 14:35:58+00:00
The use of standard cells for a process somewhat opens it for outside users.

The 80386 was the first use of standard cells for x86, which also introduced "automatic place and route" via a graduate student project named "Timberwolf."

https://www.righto.com/2023/10/intel-386-die-versions.html
by PaulHoule | 2025-08-20 14:37:18+00:00
To go into more detail.

My best model was developed about two years ago and hasn't been updated. It uses bag-of-word features as an input into logistic regression. I tried a lot of things, like BERT+pooling, and they didn't help. A model that only considers the domain is not as good as the bag-of-words.

This kind of model reaches a plateau when it has seen about 10,000-20,000 samples so for any domain (e.g. nytimes.com, phys.org) that has more than a few thousand submissions it would make sense to train a model just for that domain.

YOShiNoN and I have also submitted so many articles in the last two years that it would be worth it for me personally to make a model based on our own submissions because ultimately I'm drawing them from a different probability distribution. (I have no idea to what extent submissions behave different depending on whether or not I submit them, I know I have both fans and haters.)

I see recommendation problems as involving both: "is the topic relevant" and "is the article good quality?" The title is good for the first but very limited for the second. The domain is probably more indicative of the second but my own concept of quality is nuanced and has a bit of "dose makes the poison" kind of thinking. For instance I think phys.org articles draw out a conclusion in a scientific paper that you might not get from a superficial read (good) but they also have obnoxious ads (bad). So I feel like I only want to post a certain fraction of those.

So far as regression goes, this is what bothers me. An article that has the potential to get 800 votes might get submitted 10 times and get

1,50,4,800,1,200,1,35,105,8

votes or something like that. The ultimate predictor would show me the probability distribution, but maybe that's asking too much, and all I can really expect is the mean which is about 120 in that case. That's not a bad estimate on some level, but if was using the L2 norm I'd get a very high loss except in that case where it was 105. The loss is going to be high no matter what prediction I make so it's not like I can make a better model can cut my loss in half, but rather I can make a better model and reduce my loss by 0.1% which doesn't seem like too great of a victory -- though on some level it is an honest account of the fact that it's a crap shoot and the real uncertainty of the problem which will never go away. On the other hand, the logistic regression model gives a probability which is a very direct expression of that uncertainty.
Ask HN: How many days for China Firewall to catch my WireGuard server?
by z3wasoft3r | 2025-08-20 14:37:26+00:00
Hello,

Does anyone know how long it typically takes for the Great Firewall to block a WireGuard IP/port combination?

I set up a WireGuard instance on one of my VMs as a backup for a friend who’s visiting China for about a week. They already have NordVPN, but this is just an alternative in case that doesn’t work. From what I’ve read, WireGuard endpoints usually last only a few days before being blocked, but I’m wondering if anyone has recent, first-hand experience. Are we talking closer to two days, or could it last a full week?

Unfortunately, I wasn’t able to get an easy Android setup for Cloak + WireGuard. The devices weren’t rooted, so I couldn’t use Shadowsocks (only supported on older Android versions) or install the cloak-android APK (root required). Since this was a last-minute setup, we ended up going with plain WireGuard.
by chubot | 2025-08-20 14:37:27+00:00
Make is not a general purpose parallel DAG engine. It works well enough for small C projects and similar, but for problems of even medium complexity, it falls down HARD

Many years ago, I wrote 3 makefiles from scratch as an exploration of this (and I still use them). I described the issues here: https://lobste.rs/s/yd7mzj/developing_our_position_on_ai#c_s...

---

The better style is in a sibling reply -- invoke Make from shell, WHEN you have a problem that fits Make.

That is, the "main" should be shell, not Make. (And it's easy to write a dispatcher to different shell functions, with "$@", sometimes called a "task file" )

In general, a project's CI does not fit entirely into Make. For example, the CI for https://oils.pub/ is 4K lines of shell, and minimal YAML (portable to Github Actions and sourcehut).

https://oils.pub/release/latest/pub/metrics.wwz/line-counts/...

It invokes Make in a couple places, but I plan to get rid of all the Make in favor of Python/Ninja.
by firefax | 2025-08-20 14:37:36+00:00
You could use a psudonym. That's what I'm doing.

Occasionally I shed a username and start a new one.

The admins here seem not to mind as long as I'm not voting more than once or ban evading, and the same goes for most sites.

I used to be really into comedy -- it's perfectly possible to have a persona that doesn't tie back to you, but you need to be diligent -- separate email, phone number etc.
by Shank | 2025-08-20 14:38:03+00:00
1. Your subjective experience learning a new language is going to be up to you and how many languages you know. Ruby feels great from Java and C# to me, but maybe it won't for you.

2. The Rails guides (official) are great to learn the framework.

3. It's only relevant to learn the older versions of the framework if you're going to a company on the older versions. Realistically, 5, 6, 7, and 8 are all very similar and I would argue it's more important to start with the newest stuff and focus on upgrading apps the newest version than trying to learn the older versions (not for any particular reason, other than there have been meaningful improvements in later versions).

4. The source code, contrary to popular belief, is quite well-documented, and the official guides are also very well written. A lot of the "magic" is just DSL/plumbing that exists in the actual framework. I personally keep a copy of rails/rails locally so I can look at things when I want to, because it's really that readable.
by Brajeshwar | 2025-08-20 14:38:31+00:00
My Handwriting is, actually, not bad at all. During school days, we four friends used to kinda compete on many things, including Handwriting. We tried a lot, from cursive to type-like to stick, to cowboy’s rope, to queen’s drape, and all sorts.

After high-school, I settled on a mix between a curvy to type-ish Handwriting, which I carry to this day. A few years back, my daughters complained that my Handwriting is “too stylish” for this day-n-age. Even their teachers had to decode why I write some letters the way I write.

So, about a year back, I decided to dedicate a blank Notebook (not ruled or dotted) and I’ve been practicing a simplified version, mostly by removing the curves so they and the younger generations can read it easier. I’m taking it slow - write once a week or so.

For me, it is therapeutic to feel the tactile feedback and listen to the subtle scratchy sound made when the fountain pen writes on well-made paper. https://brajeshwar.com/2025/handwriting/
by gaowanliang | 2025-08-20 14:38:49+00:00
I agree with the common sentiment that handwriting is a great tool for thinking. I prefer paperless studying, but I'm always looking for good tools for writing on my electronic devices. Although formal typesetting is beautiful, my long-standing habit of handwriting always makes me want to add my own notes. That's why I really like using OneNote, as it allows me to combine both typing and handwriting.
by impossiblefork | 2025-08-20 14:39:32+00:00
But consider it like this: the model lives in a reward environment where it's tasked with outputting prescribed text or outputting the answer to certain questions.

Instead of just outputting the answer it generates non-output tokens based on which the probability of the answer that got it rewards before are increased.

Is this not a sort of reasoning? It looks ahead at imagined things and tries to gauge what will get it the reward?
by IAmBroom | 2025-08-20 14:39:40+00:00
I was sternly told by a nun that, with my handwriting, I would never get a job.

The only thing in my entire career I've ever been asked to write something in cursive is my signature, which I reduced to a squiggle for efficiency reasons. (The history of signatures is fascinating, BTW. Illiterate Charlemagne "signed" documents with a single horizontal stroke of the pen, inside of a premade 99%-completed "signature".)

I am employed, and she's long-dead.
by JdeBP | 2025-08-20 14:40:14+00:00
M. Anderson was not wrong in this particular case. Indeed, Bernstein xyrself was on the bind-users mailing list discussing the vulnerability to packet forgery, just after the turn of the 21st century. The reason that the famous djbdns security guarantee excluded forgery is that it was well known then that there were basic protocol problems in this area, and basically it was speed and luck that had been keeping them at bay.

It should tell you something that even I, who am and was on a different continent to all of these people, knew about this stuff well before it became an ISC press release. I'd like to say that it was Paul Jarc who went into the consequences of what one could do with response forgeries, on Bernstein's dns mailing list, but I might be remembering the wrong person. Certainly, list regulars had read Bernstein's discussion of DNS security and realized the implications.

The logical consequences of being able to forge whatever response one likes were readily apparent. Bert Hubert noted publicly at the time of the Kaminsky announcements that xe had been not only aware of this for years,

* https://mailman.powerdns.com/pipermail/pdns-users/2008-July/...

but had even been trying to get an IETF draft approved about port+ID randomization, and bailiwick checking, acknowledging the factors involved and promoting the adoption of the well-known mitigations as mandatory.

Amusingly for the instant case of researchers rediscovering the well-known, you can read M. Hubert's first draft from a year and a half before the ISC press release, and it lays out there exactly what I laid out here elsewhere in this very discussion, about a query to Google Public DNS taking a second from cold to answer for ~.www.example.com and that being more than enough time to send a tonne of forged responses at 2006 network speeds.

* https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-dnsext-forg...
by fluoridation | 2025-08-20 14:40:21+00:00
For me personally it's simpler to think about it as having an f(theta, r) = r (cos(thetha), sin(theta)), interpreting theta as a compass direction and r as a distance to walk along a great circle. So g(t) = polar_to_R3(f(t k, t l)). Changing the relative sizes of k and l changes the tightness of the helix.
by mdaniel | 2025-08-20 14:40:26+00:00
We actually already have one of those, and it still fits just for a different reason:

> The first 90% is easy/fast/cheap, it's the second 90% that's hard/slow/expensive

Since most of the generative approaches treat code as disposable, then the second (and subsequent) 90% approaches just throw it away and start over. It's like all the awesome parts about a rewrite, with all the awesome parts about "it was rewritten because no one understood it"
by krogenx | 2025-08-20 14:40:28+00:00
I haven’t played with any stationary antennas but I think it’s possible.

The scanner that is used in the video has configuration for transmit power. At its maximum setting, the range is 15 feet with clear line of sight.

Tags with larger antennas, generally speaking, have longer range but might be too big for younger chickens.

So overall there are a lot of variables.
by close04 | 2025-08-20 14:40:47+00:00
If a government finds a sector or company to have strategic importance they will not let it die. The rest is free-market absolutism that never comes to be. I believe today more than ever the US considers Intel to be of strategic importance.

> the money will flow there

Which money? The CHIPS act [0] isn't only for the ones who produce "better chips for less".

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CHIPS_and_Science_Act
by mbreese | 2025-08-20 14:41:13+00:00
As far as I have read, even with themselves as the primary customer, there is still enough excess capacity to make it unprofitable to use the most advanced processes. I see it as a strict cost issue — the new fab costs $X to run. Intel can only keep it running Y% of the time with its own orders. You need someone to fill in the gap. Not to mention, at the moment the entire cost of an Intel fab is being amortized across only Intel chips. If they can spread that out to external customers, then they can start to make their CPUs more cost competitive (or better margins, or both).

Plus, if the goal is to make more chips domestically (of all kinds), Intel will need to show that they can fab chips for other customers, not just their own designs.
Show HN: I built a GitHub-style contribution graph for Claude Code usage
by virtuallyvivek | 2025-08-20 14:41:52+00:00
I've been using Claude Code a bunch lately and wanted to see my usage patterns visualized like GitHub's contribution graph (mostly out of curiosity).

So I built ccheatmap - a tiny CLI tool that reads your local Claude Code usage data and renders it as a heatmap right in your terminal.

npx ccheatmap

It just reads the JSON files Claude Code already writes to ~/.config/claude/projects/ and shows you:

- Daily session counts (or token usage, or interactions) - Weekly patterns (turns out I use Claude most on Tuesdays ) - Total stats for the period - Nice color gradients to represent activity

The whole thing is ~300 lines of TypeScript. Nothing fancy - just parsing timestamps, bucketing by day, and rendering colored Unicode blocks.

What surprised me: weekend usage often spiked way higher than weekdays. Turns out I tend to vibe code more on side projects when the stakes are lower.

Repo: https://github.com/viveknair/ccheatmap

Would love to hear if others track their AI tool usage differently, or if there are other metrics that would be interesting to visualize. Also curious if anyone else has noticed usage patterns they didn't expect.

I was inspired by ryoppippi's ccusage tool which has cost tracking and detailed usage analytics - definitely check that out if you need deeper insights.
by chasil | 2025-08-20 14:42:21+00:00
The actual ARM1 processor was built for the "tube" connection on a 6502-based 8-bit BBC Microcomputer in the early 1980s.

These two articles are popular for the details of that history. ARM dominates the second.

https://www.theregister.com/2012/05/02/unsung_heroes_of_tech...

https://www.theregister.com/2012/05/03/unsung_heroes_of_tech...
by IIsi50MHz | 2025-08-20 14:42:50+00:00
Risk of ESD increases exponentially as humidity decreases. 40% is the recommended minimum. But, humidity is not sufficient to ensure safety.

Equipotential bonding is required (commonly "grounding", but the important bit is that all conductors are at the same electrical potential). For personnel, the bonding device MUST include a 1 MOhm series resistor.

Items which have not been in sufficient humidity for at least 48 hours are at increased risk.

Assuming your most sensitive component has a nominal ESD survivability of 250V, the maximum charge difference between items must be less than 100V.

Just crossing your legs or standing from a chair can generate very high static voltages. Removing a plastic film near exposed components is not recommended.

Charge generation happens whenever surfaces separate, including when they slide or roll.

If you want to discharge non-conducting materials, you need a balanced stream of ions, but that's beyond most home or field-service setups.
by thewebguyd | 2025-08-20 14:42:57+00:00
> But Rails is hard to beat for CRUD apps.

I'm honestly surprised it didn't take off massively for internal enterprise CRUD stuff. It's by far the most productive stack I've ever used, the second closest being .NET w/ EntityFramework.

It was the darling of the early SaaS explosion of the early 2000s, and then just kind of died off in hype.

I like that it's opinionated, stops be from going down rabbit holes, and batteries included. There's nothing in the JS/TS framework of the day world that leaves me wondering "hmm, maybe I should stop using rails for this." It all seems worse, somehow, despite being more "modern."
by josevalim | 2025-08-20 14:43:29+00:00
As you said, the best would be for you to give it a try and see the benefits in practice (if any). Beyond that, I can add to two points you brought up:

First, Playwright MCP is really not enough. For example, imagine you are building a project management software and you are working on a feature for transferring tasks between projects. Testing this feature requires at least a user who is admin and at least two projects. When it is time for Playwright to test this feature, you need to automate the account creation, then it has to set up two projects, add the task, etc, and it often gets stuck.

When you are using Tidewave, you naturally do this setup as part of your development, which Tidewave has direct access to during tests. So it just interacts with the same page. Furthermore, if you see any bugs or places you could improve, you can't really tell Playwright or regular coding agent to fix them, you have to translate what you want. With Tidewave you just point and click and it works across browsers. I talk more about this in the announcement post: https://tidewave.ai/blog/tidewave-web-phoenix-rails

Other than that, I am really curious about the handoff between Tidewave and the editor that you mentioned. At some point, you will need the editor indeed, but how to best do this transaction? Should you be able to review and do tiny tweaks within Tidewave first? Regardless, moving the agent to the browser for web applications bring enough benefits to justify going one lever higher. :)
by renewiltord | 2025-08-20 14:43:57+00:00
Isn’t it funny how these short forms happen? Some friends of mine refer to lactose intolerance as “lactose”; it’s common parlance in the US to have “ejected/arrested for trespassing” be called “trespassing” (“I’m going to trespass you”).

And this disease “the fish destroyer” is now called by the beginning of the word for fish!

I wonder if there is a list of these things somewhere.