MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by traceroute66 | 2025-08-08 08:08:26+00:00
> How hard could it be to set up a trust

I have little knowledge of these things either, I've only heard second hand because aspects of historical tech $work used to put me in close proximity to professionals who deal with these things. Eventually you get a noob level understanding once you've been in the same room long enough.

TL;DR A trust is not a "simple" legal form like a company is.

You have to consider the three-way "internal" relationship (settlor <-> trustee <-> beneficiaries). Which can be legally structured as you wish (blank sheet when writing the trust deeds). And then for "external" relationships (trust <-> third party), the in-country law will apply and so you need to know how that fits in.

Then you need to know what type of trust you want. Do you want a Fixed Interest Trust ? A Discretionary Trust ? A Charitable Trust ? A Special Purpose Trust ? Something else ?

Then you have things like professional relationships. Your trust will, for example, almost certainly need an in-country bank account. Your professional advisor will almost certainly know some bankers.

So sometimes its easier just to hire an advisor, work through the prep, then fly in for the day for a nice lunch with your advisor to sign a few papers.
by nextaccountic | 2025-08-08 08:09:11+00:00
They were made up by the author, but actually kind of make sense

It's, like, an ideographic alphabet

https://muratkasimov.art/Ya/Operators explains a bit

The problem is, it explains in a language for people that know category theory, rather than people that merely use functors, applicatives and monads in Haskell

Indeed we could say that those programming interfaces don't need a lot of category theory to understand. For example, in Java a functor would be called Mappable (and actually it seems there is such a thing defined in some libs)
by eru | 2025-08-08 08:09:38+00:00
> Another difference is that most content can wait the couple of hours it takes the skilled worker to create it, [...]

I wouldn't just willy nilly turn my daughter's drawings into cartoons, if I had to bother a trained professional about it.

A few hours of a qualified worker's time takes a couple hundred bucks at minimum. And it takes at least a couple of hours to turn around the task.

Your argument seems a bit like web search being useless, because we have highly trained librarians.

Similar for electronic computers vs human computers.

> I think you are talking about the 1971 ILWU strike. https://www.ilwu.org/history/the-ilwu-story/

No, not really. I have a more global view in mind, eg Felixtowe vs London.

And, yes, you do mechanisation so that you can save on labour. Mass layoffs are just one expression of this (when you don't have enough natural attrition from people quitting).

You seem very keen on the American labour movements? There's another interesting thing to learn from history here: industry will move elsewhere, when labour movements get too annoying. Both to other parts of the country, and to other parts of the world.
by weatherlite | 2025-08-08 08:09:55+00:00
He may have dealt with all kinds of weaknesses that A.I won't deal with such as - lack of self confidence, inability to concentrate for long, lack of ambition, boredom, other pursuits etc etc. But what if we can write some while loop with a super strong AGI model that starts working on all of our problems relentlessly? Without getting bored, without losing confidence. Make that one billion super strong AGI models.
by ahofmann | 2025-08-08 08:10:25+00:00
This is not the point, or other numbers matter more, then yours.

In 2005 we wrote entire games for browsers without any frontend framework (jQuery wasn't invented yet) and managed to generate responses in under 80 ms in PHP. Most users had their first bytes in 200 ms and it felt instant to them, because browsers are incredibly fast, when treated right.

So the Internet was indeed much faster then, as opposed to now. Just look at GitHub. They used to be fast. Now they rewrite their frontend in react and it feels sluggish and slow.
by jimbo808 | 2025-08-08 08:12:42+00:00
It makes sense. People said software engineers would be easy to replace with AI, because our work can be run on a computer and easily tested, but the disconnect is that the primary strength of LLMs is that they can draw on huge bodies of information, and that's not the primary skill programmers are paid for. It does help programmers when you're doing trivial CRUD work or writing boilerplate, but every programmer will eventually have to be able to actually truly reason about code, and LLMs fundamentally cannot do that (not even the "reasoning" models).

Medical diagnosis relies heavily on knowledge, pattern recognition, a bunch of heuristics, educated guesses, luck, etc. These are all things LLMs do very well. They don't need a high degree of accuracy, because humans are already doing this work with a pretty low degree of accuracy. They just have to be a little more accurate.
by kmlx | 2025-08-08 08:13:03+00:00
> their business is successful in large part because of the infrastructure in their country, the educated people they can hire, the healthcare

Germany has Europe’s lowest share of entrepreneurs to workforce. So i guess the infrastructure, education and healthcare are not really factors.

> So when you get money out of this, you pay your fair share of taxes, like everyone.

this is already happening. people are paying their taxes. but Germany wants more than it’s fair.

cherry on top: Germany has been in recession for… 3 years now?
by terencege | 2025-08-08 08:14:44+00:00
I'm also building a local first editor and rolling my own CRDTs. There are enormous challenges to make it work. For example the storage size issue mentioned in the blog, I end up using with yjs' approach which only increase the clock for upsertion, and for deletion remove the content and only remain deleted item ids which can be efficiently compressed since most ids are continuous.
by weatherlite | 2025-08-08 08:14:56+00:00
> I'm in the same 150+ group. I really think it doesn't mean much on its own.

You're right but the things you could do with it if you applied yourself are totally out of reach for me; for example it's quite possible for you to become an A.I researcher in one of the leading companies and make millions. I just don't have that kind of intellectual capacity. You could make it into med school and also make millions. I'm not saying all this matters that much, with all due respect to financial success, but I don't think we can pretend our society doesn't reward high IQs.
by mentalgear | 2025-08-08 08:15:25+00:00
Local-First & Sync-Engines are the future. Here's a great filterable datatable overview of the local-first framework landscape: https://www.localfirst.fm/landscape

My favorite so far is Triplit.dev (which can also be combined with TanStack DB); 2 more I like to explore are PowerSync and NextGraph. Also, the recent LocalFirst Conf has some great videos, currently watching the NextGraph one (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gaadDmZWIzE).
by freetonik | 2025-08-08 08:15:50+00:00
Location: Finland (EU Citizen)

Remote: Yes

Willing to relocate: Ireland only

Technologies: Python, Rust, Go, Ruby/Ruby on Rails, Clojure, Java, TypeScript/JavaScript; PostgreSQL, Docker, Kubernetes, AWS, GCP, Cloudflare Dev. Platform

Résumé/CV: https://rakhim.org/Rakhim_Davletkaliyev_CV.pdf

Email: hello at rakhim.org

Ex-startup founder, technical lead, currently staff software engineer at a superconducting quantum computers manufacturer.
by renegat0x0 | 2025-08-08 08:16:11+00:00
Huh, I I have been working on solution to that problem.

My project allows to define rules for various sites, so eventually everything is scraped correctly. For YouTube yet dlp is also used to augment results.

I can crawl using requests, selenium, Httpx and others. Response is via json so it easy to process.

The downside is that it may not be the fastest solution, and I have not tested it against proxies.

https://github.com/rumca-js/crawler-buddy
by DrSarez | 2025-08-08 08:16:11+00:00
Crush (compared to OpenCode): - Pro: Sexy UI with separate diff window and good information context - Con: No SSO with Antropic. You need to generate an API key - Con: No login with Github Copilot - Con: Rly bad planning capabilities as agend. Acts awskwardly, executes single commands instead of batch commands. - Con: Thus it is really slow. - Con: Uses much more tokens for operations than OpenCode

Currently I would definately go with sst/opencode. Seems like crush is much more a beta.
by mark_undoio | 2025-08-08 08:16:14+00:00
I'm pretty comfortable with the agent scaffolding just restricting directory access but I can see places it might not be enough...

If you were being really paranoid then I guess they could write a script in the local directory that then runs and accesses other parts of the filesystem.

I've not seen any evidence an agent would just do that randomly (though I suppose they are nondeterministic). In principle maybe a malicious or unlucky prompt found somewhere in the permitted directory could trigger it?
by roenxi | 2025-08-08 08:16:35+00:00
They can and frequently such people are; but they aren't very obvious because they stop while the business is still small. If we don't harness greed into doing something productive then there isn't enough motivation in the world to power a modern industrial society. People like Bezos would just sit around running a local bakery or something instead.

The way the system works is people who create unfathomable amounts of wealth get to keep unreasonable amounts of it. If that link is broken, they'll stop at creating a reasonable amount of wealth and then everything grinds to a halt. If someone is in a situation where they are doing a good thing they should have every incentive to keep going and not stop.
by fyrn_ | 2025-08-08 08:17:27+00:00
You won't be double taxed, the US taxes the difference between your local income tax rate and the US federal tax rate. So if you live in London you're not paying any US tax because the UK income tax rate is higher. It helps stop rich people from "totally live in <tax haven>". If only we had that for companies..

I think where people get confused is that it's implemented as a tax credit which is equal to the income tax you pay locally.

On top of that the first $130k earned is also exempt, so it only applies to high earners as well
by derriz | 2025-08-08 08:17:58+00:00
It’s not as crazy as it initially seems.

It’s because of a fundamental difference between how capital gains tax and income tax are collected.

Capital gains are deferred - so as years pass you’re working up a tax liability but most countries recognize that forcing collection every year is not practical given the often illiquid nature of capital gains and the difficulty around valuation.

I’m from a country which has no exit tax on capital gains and notoriously a certain wealthy telecoms magnet - having been resident all his life - moved to Portugal just before realizing billions of capital gain. Thus despite earning multiple billions through businesses activities in his native country, he effectively paid zero tax.

I myself have benefited from this lack of capital gain exit tax as I moved to a country with very low capital gains tax. So despite the fact that my modest equity portfolio earned most of its growth while I was living in Ireland, when I sell, the Irish government will get nothing.

The problem, it seems to me is the method of valuation for the deemed disposal and/or the fact that it can cause a “liquidity squeeze“ for the tax payer.

I don’t see a simple solution - maybe other than getting rid of capital gains taxes completely and collecting more consumption taxes, for example, but I’m sure this would just open up a range of other tax evading loopholes.
by assd12138 | 2025-08-08 08:18:10+00:00
Buy a cheap ESP8266 development board and apply for an MQTT service with a certain free quota from EMQX (or other cloud service providers). You can then use this small development board to send broadcasts within the local network (including WOL requests), paying only a few dollars for the development board. Running such a simple Arduino program consumes much fewer resources compared to running Node.js within the local network, and it's also more power-efficient.
by mike_hearn | 2025-08-08 08:18:16+00:00
Yes, but what are we arguing about here really? I've never said monopolies are good or that MPEG having competition was bad, just that MPEG did a decent job of developing widely used standards at the time and the (still patented) web codecs came decades later, funded by monopoly profits. The alternative to MPEG's pooling and standards wasn't AV1 in 1990, it was RealVideo, Apple Video, Sorensen Spark and quite possibly single vendor lockin for all digital video, as happened with operating systems.
by procaryote | 2025-08-08 08:18:19+00:00
Lots of countries have some level of exit tax on unrealised capital gains, but the devil is in the details. A painful part in the German case is that they have a fixed company valuation method that might make it untenable to leave the country.

It's one thing to tax people on assets they actually have or that are easily realisable like ETFs, as they then pay a portion of money they have ready access to. It's quite a different thing to invent a value for something and tax on that. The company ownership in question might not be realisable at anything close to that amount, especially for a startup, if you don't leave before making a profit

So don't do startups in Germany. The exit tax is just one of many reasons for that, the whole German system is bureocratic and inflexible compared to nearby countries.
by somenameforme | 2025-08-08 08:18:24+00:00
Absolutely, and it was Bush who started it. But Biden oversaw the retreat and it was our biggest failure since Vietnam, and so it will always be his loss. This is also why LBJ is 'LBJ's war' even though he, too, did not start it. Trump's well aware of this reality which is why every interview he does he tries to stress that Ukraine was Biden's war, but he knows that in the end he inherited this disaster and so, in the end, he'll be the one associated with it, so he wants to 'cleanly' wash his hands of it as quickly as possible. And since Zelensky seems increasingly delusional, it's likely that giving it to Europe is his only real out.
by nabanita | 2025-08-08 08:19:47+00:00
Every site on the internet has the same problem right now:

AI companies are scraping everything, code, articles, images and using it to train models without consent or payment.

The tools we’ve relied on for decades (robots.txt, rate limiting, legal notices) don’t work anymore. They’re easy to ignore, hard to enforce, and give you zero control once your content is scraped.

I built AI Privacy License: a machine-readable, legally aligned licensing framework that travels with your content after it’s scraped. Link : https://aiprivacylicense.com/ • Works for code, datasets, text, images, research papers, blogs, anything online • Lets you set rules: “no AI training,” “academic use only,” “paid commercial use,” etc. • Generates both a legal license and technical enforcement signals (SPDX, JSON-LD, HTTP headers, robots.txt integration) • Public registry so creators can see who’s protected

Think of it as Creative Commons for the AI era except your license enforces itself after the fact.

You can try it free here: https://aiprivacylicense.com

Curious to hear what the HN community thinks: • What’s the best way to standardize this so AI companies have no excuse not to comply? • How should enforcement and attribution work at scale?

https://aiprivacylicense.com/ - Demo + free generator
by iamnotagenius | 2025-08-08 08:19:59+00:00
glm 4 (1 sec):

To determine the cutoff frequency (fc ) for an RC circuit (since you've provided resistance R and capacitance C, but not inductance L), we can use the following formula:

[.... calculation]

So, the cutoff frequency is approximately 31.83 kHz.

Note:

If you intended to ask about an RLC circuit (with both R, L, and C), please provide the inductance L value, and I can calculate the cutoff frequency for that case as well. The formula would then involve both L and C.
by groby_b | 2025-08-08 08:22:34+00:00
WFH also made it massively easier for people to slack off/pretend to do multiple jobs.

And life was disproportionately more difficult for more junior folks.

WFH was far from an unalloyed good that only got abandoned "because it made surveillance harder".

Would it be possible to salvage WFH? Maybe. At a bare minimum, it'd require rapidly firing the abusers. And spending a lot more on helping juniors grow.
by aredox | 2025-08-08 08:22:48+00:00
>The other problem is special pleading - the author adds more and more conditions on what constitutes the "paranoid style", until he's able to isolate the phenomenon to mostly the right half of the political spectrum. Meanwhile one can make a career of blaming everything on capitalism, colonialism, racism, or whiteness [1], and remain safely in the clear.

The author already answered in the second paragraph:

"Of course this term is pejorative, and it is meant to be; the paranoid style has a greater affinity for bad causes than good. But nothing really prevents a sound program or demand from being advocated in the paranoid style. Style has more to do with the way in which ideas are believed than with the truth or falsity of their content."

Or here:

"In the history of the United States one find it, for example, in the anti-Masonic movement, the nativist and anti-Catholic movement, in certain spokesmen of abolitionism who regarded the United States as being in the grip of a slaveholders’ conspiracy, in many alarmists about the Mormons, in some Greenback and Populist writers who constructed a great conspiracy of international bankers, in the exposure of a munitions makers’ conspiracy of World War I, in the popular left-wing press, in the contemporary American right wing, and on both sides of the race controversy today, among White Citizens’ Councils and Black Muslims."

>Meanwhile one can make a career of blaming everything on capitalism, colonialism, racism, or whiteness [1], and remain safely in the clear.

Yeah, there is a difference between blaming things on a shadowy tiny hidden cabal of vaguely-defined conspirators whose existence you don't even attempt to prove, and blaming... you know... the people actually in charge.

I mean, the people in power during most of the last centuries and decades have been white, racist, colonialist and capitalists. That's a fact. That is how they defined themselves openly.

So, you are in effect saying that "reality has a well-known liberal bias".
by mike_hearn | 2025-08-08 08:23:04+00:00
The "non robust strategy" refers to relying on goodnatured monopolies to fund free technologies, not a format being free. When it works its nice, but I am indeed old enough to remember the GIF patent wars, which means I'm also old enough to remember when the big rich monopoly in town was Microsoft (and before them, IBM). Neither Microsoft nor Apple were like Google and the tech they produced was much more closed than MPEG. The idea that MPEG took away some Stallmanist idyll is just ahistorical.
by jononor | 2025-08-08 08:24:39+00:00
Probably a fair bit of hubris, sure. But right now it is not possible or legal to operate a company without a CEO, in Norway. And I suspect that is the case in basically all jurisdictions. And I do not see any reason why this would change in an increasingly automated world. The rule of law is ultimately based on personal responsibility (limited in case of corporations but nevertheless). And there are so many bad actors looking to defraud people and avoid responsibility, those still need protecting against in an AI world. Perhaps even more so...

You can claim that the AI is the CEO, and in a hypothetical future, it may handle most of the operations. But the government will consider a person to be the CEO. And the same is likely to apply to basic B2B like contracts - only a person can sign legal documents (perhaps by delegating to an AI, but ultimately it is a person under current legal frameworks).
by tedggh | 2025-08-08 08:24:45+00:00
In my experience and use case Grok is pretty much unusable when working with medium size codebases and systems design. ChatGPT has issues too but at least I have figured out a way around most of them, like asking for a progress and todo summary and uploading a zip file of my codebase to a new chat window say every 100 interactions, because speed degrades and hallucinations increase. Super Grok seems extremely bad at keeping context during very short interactions within a project even when providing it with a strong foundation via instructions. For example if the code name for a system or feature is called Jupiter, Grok will many times start talking about Jupiter the planet.
by mike_hearn | 2025-08-08 08:25:09+00:00
In practice nobody outside a handful of developers and executives at rich tech firms seems to care about video codec licensing - open codecs were barely used anywhere until they matched the quality of the MPEG standards. They still aren't that widely used. H.264 is supposedly 90%+ of all digital video even now (well, as of a few years ago at least according to Google).
by sgt101 | 2025-08-08 08:25:33+00:00
A big dynamic in this is that the business models for two of the biggest players are at stake.

Google is facing a significant danger that its search advertising business is going to just disappear. If people are using AI to find stuff or get recommendations then then aren't using google. Why should a photographer continue to spend $200 a month on ads when their clients are coming from openAI? Especially when OpenAI is using the organic search results. Meta is facing the same sort of issue, if the eyeballs aren't on insta then the ad $$$ go somewhere else.

So if they have money, and can get money, they will invest it to protect their businesses - all of it.

MS and VC's are doing the opposite, they are investing with the idea of taking the attention that Google and Meta currently have, but they are also following the "I'm scared" signal that Google and Meta have put in the market.
by watwut | 2025-08-08 08:25:41+00:00
That would be "enlightened centrists". You know having that thing where you do not condone apparent nonsense, but you will really really go far out of your way to sane wash and give absurd benefits of the doubt - but only to "the side you totally are not supporting no".

The opponents of "the side you totally are not supporting no" wont get any benefits of doubt, will have words super scrutinized and instead sanewashed will be exaggerated.
by avodonosov | 2025-08-08 08:25:45+00:00
I am sarcastic because this discussion is about a different attack. Not about fishing.

(The OP says one time codes are worse than passwords. In case of fishing passwords fail the same way as one time codes.)

I was also sarcastic/provocative even in the prev comment, saying the GOOD site always includes a warning with the code making the attack impossible. A variation of the attack is very widely used by phone scammers: "Hello, we are updating intercomm on your appartment block. Please tell us your name and phone number. Ok, you will receive a code now, tell it to us". Yet many online services and banks still send one time codes without a warning to never share it!

The fishing point may also be used in defence of one time codes: if the GOOD service was using passwords instead of one time codes, the BAD could just initiated fishing attack, redirecting the user to a fake login page - people today are used to "Login with" flow.