MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by zem | 2025-08-20 20:11:02+00:00
there is a new python team, we met up with them at pycon and had some nice conversations. as a former pytype dev I will be the first to admit that maintaining it as a legacy project without the context of having developed it over the years would not have been a pleasant experience at all, but also pytype, while very powerful at what it did, definitely had some flaws that put it firmly in the last generation of type checkers.

the current generation (mostly ty and pyrefly right now, though major props to pyright for being ahead of the curve) is moving towards fast, incremental type checking with LSP integration, and pytype was never going to get there. it's fundamentally a slow, batch-based type checker, which will catch a lot of errors in your project, but which will never be usable as an incremental type checker within your ide. add that to the fact that it had a different philosophy of type checking from most of the other major checkers and you had users facing the issue that their code would be checked one way by pyright in the ide, and then a subtly different way by pytype in the CI pipeline.

I loved my time working on pytype, and I would like to see some of its features added to pyrefly, but it has definitely been superseded by now.
by nemothekid | 2025-08-20 20:11:41+00:00
1. I've never denied any of the accomplishments of tesla, so I don't know why you keep re-iterating them. Do you work for Tesla's marketing dept?

2. The first Roadster was shipped (to Musk, funny enough), 8 months before Elon became CEO. Let's be reasonable - I don't know how you can apply the founder/ceo label to a guy who was not ceo when their first product had already shipped.

There are plenty of stories (especially pre-Zuckerberg), or people starting companies, then being replaced by the board by a "real CEO" once they raised real money. These people are not founder/ceos. Google has a near identical path to Tesla; after Google's first real venture round, they hired Eric Schmidt as CEO, but Eric Schmidt is not the "founder" of Google.

I understand Elon has tied his public image to being the "founder" of Tesla; to the point that there was a lawsuit involved. However let's talk in plain terms here, he is not a founder of Tesla in binary terms.

Again, if it makes you feel better - you can read through my comments and note that I have never said anything qualitative about Tesla. I've said nothing about their growth, market cap, or Elon sleeping on production floors. I've simply said Elon was not a founder at Tesla, and therefore is not the group of people I think of as exceptional founder/ceos.

If you really wanted to steelman your argument, you'd be using SpaceX, which he did start, and was involved with before Tesla.
by lotyrin | 2025-08-20 20:11:52+00:00
I feel you handle this balance quite gracefully, to the point where I was impressed at your handling of the issue while reading and before checking the comments section. I don't know why the idea of something being called something by marketing or documentation (names which one must, strategically accept and internalize) but fundamentally and functionally being better described with other language isn't clearer (which is more useful, so also needed) to the grandparent poster. You want people to be aware of both and explain both without dwelling or getting caught on it, it struck me as an artful choice.
by JumpCrisscross | 2025-08-20 20:12:49+00:00
> that it was a CEO of a department that was shot

That’s not a CEO. It’s a performative title. The point is the people this article concerns itself with, CEOs of top companies, actual CEOs, they’re not the ones getting shot. Their direct reports, or in the case of Blackstone, I believe, their reports’ reports, are the ones taking the bullets.
by thewebguyd | 2025-08-20 20:13:04+00:00
> best of a bad bunch of compromises

That's exactly why I don't particularly care for it, but still use it.

My first choice would be Linux + a tiling WM. I used DWM for years before Apple Silicon, and have been on mac ever since the M1. These new machines are so nice that I can't go back to anything else now, whether I hate the software or not.

But macOS is just baffling. There's POSIX underneath, and it's mostly reliable, and it has a lot of little nice touches - being able to search the menu with Cmd+Shift+/, emacs keybindings in nearly every text field, etc. But then there's stuff that makes no sense. Why do I need a third party app for any sort of sane window management? (and even then, I haven't fully replicated my preferred way of working, only gotten close enough with Aerospace, and more recently Raycast). A third party app to set a keyboard shortcut to launch an application. I can't disable the animations for switching virtual desktops, and when you switch there's a lag before it's responsive again for keyboard input (I just want this to be instant).

So much of how macOS expects you to interact with it seems to be mouse/touchpad driven, and that's just not how I prefer to use my computer. At least with Raycast I now have shortcuts to launch and switch to apps (but not specific app windows because of the app/window separation in macOS). Yet even still, I can't set a keyboard shortcut to move a window to a different space. I have to click and hold the title bar and then press my shortcut for moving to that space to move the window - Apple decided that action MUST involve the mouse.

I also can't set window rules. I can't tell my terminal to always open on workspace 2, or mail.app to always open on workspace 4 at a specific size, etc. Making an app full screen also creates a new ephemeral space that can't be switched to with the usual Ctrl+NUM keyboard shortcut. I can't set a window to be always on top.

I'm more or less waiting for Asahi Linux to get support for DisplayPort ALT mode & M4 support, although I'm not holding my breath.

I do appreciate having access to the big commercial apps though on macOS, but ultimately I want my M4 macbook pro w/ Linux & hyprland.
by aranelsurion | 2025-08-20 20:14:52+00:00
There was a time around ST2 when it felt like everyone was using it and it could've become The Editor, then something happened and it's been left in the dust. I wasn't even aware but apparently even fourth version of ST was released, and that was in 2021.

I lost track of what happened there (moved to Vim back then), was it VSCode that killed it?
by toomuchtodo | 2025-08-20 20:16:03+00:00
Reverse skin aging signs by red light photobiomodulation - https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/srt.13391 | https://doi.org/10.1111/srt.13391 - June 30th, 2023

Omnilux Clinical Bibliography - https://omniluxled.com/pages/clinical-bibliography
by jfengel | 2025-08-20 20:17:13+00:00
Fermat lived for nearly three decades after writing that note about the marvelous proof. It's not as if he never got a chance to write it down. So it sure wasn't his "last theorem" -- later ones include proving the specific case of n=4.

There are many invalid proofs of the theorem, some of whose flaws are not at all obvious. It is practically certain that Fermat had one of those in mind when he scrawled his note. He realized that and abandoned it, never mentioning it again (or correcting the note he scrawled in the margin).
by bosky101 | 2025-08-20 20:17:28+00:00
Rye allows you to even enter shipping info and pay for the product. But I can't help but feel it hasn't got the traction it deserves.

1) Are there plans to allow Devs to do the same?

2) why wouldn't you open the limit beyond 1000 free as long as you are making a rev share

3) does this pick from Shopify products/stores?

Imo the agentic loop isn't really closed unless you allow agents to pay and paywalls today aren't agent friendly. Tokenized cards, 16 digital cards. Perhaps but this involves high trust from users. Which means you are left with guiding users to the link and hoping they buy the product.

4) partnering with merchants where cards are already tokenized maybe your best converting potential customer base. But it's easy to do evil here, or loose trust without guardrails.

5) I would come up with a process to incentivize adding products to the ecosystem. However tiny the reward.

Lot of opportunity. Nice pitch. Good luck!

Would try this out of you can increase the 1k limit to something that is a win:win
by ompogUe | 2025-08-20 20:17:35+00:00
I discriminate adulthood 2 ways:

"legal"/"federally protected" adulthood - 21 - can vote, drink, etc.

"biological" adulthood - brain is not fully developed until ~25, and takes a few years to "activate/realize" those "powers", so ~30 for "actual, mature" adult processes to start taking place. ~40 seems appropriate within that as an outer boundary of "early" adulthood.
by abetusk | 2025-08-20 20:18:19+00:00
No. I may have a guess of what the intended license is but what the license says is complete nonsense. It's self contradictory.

If they want to let people use it in non-commercial settings but are willing to provide a license for commercial use, then they could have provided a non-commercial license.

If they wanted to provide a FOSS license, then they should have provided one and offered a dual license option (by the actual commonly accepted usage of that term in this context).

If they want to make an MIT-like license but make it for non-commercial use, then they should just call it a non-commercial license and not confuse the issue by claiming it's MIT.

As it stands, they've provided a FOSS license, that explicitly allows the use, modification, redistribution and resale in commercial settings, but slapped a "non-commercial" term at the top of it.

"Please use this software however you like, including in commercial settings, redistributing it for profit and modifying it for your commercial use. Also, don't use it for commercial use"

What?
by jiehong | 2025-08-20 20:18:28+00:00
Interesting phones, but the snark in the live video wasn’t that amazing. Aren’t the products enough in and out of themselves to be attractive?

Complaining about Apple walled garden, but only able to pull off their AI help if you are part of their Google garden and a lot of it on the cloud.

Same for Pixel Snap being MagSafe (sounds like a camera feature at first).

7 years of software updates promised, that’s actually nice.
by glawrence13 | 2025-08-20 20:18:34+00:00
Thanks for the feedback. Releasing early vs releasing a polished product is always a tough balance to strike, and I'm grateful for insights like this. Do you have specific queries that missed the mark, or specific problems with the results? The common refrain we've heard is some products surfaced are good, but some random products also slip in there. If that's not consistent with your experience, I'd love to know what went wrong!
by jraph | 2025-08-20 20:19:11+00:00
/e/ Foundation sells phones with /e/OS preinstalled if you'd like an ungoogled Android phone without having to wipe the OS and install an ungoogled Android yourself.

I haven't tried /e/, I prefer installing a raw lineage with microG myself (although I don't currently use the microG part), but it seems like you and your parent commenter would be in the intended target.

I do agree that an alternative would be great. I'd gladly use Linux mobile with good, realiable hardware.
by regularfry | 2025-08-20 20:19:27+00:00
Honestly just having to manage IAM is such a time-suck that the way I've explained it to people is that we've traded the time we used to spend administering systems for time spent just managing permissions, and IAM is so obtuse that it comes out as a net loss.

There's a sweet spot somewhere in between raw VPSes and insanely detailed least-privilege serverless setups that I'm trying to revert to. Fargate isn't unmanageable as a candidate, not sure it's The One yet but I'm going to try moving more workloads to it to find out.
by TheCraiggers | 2025-08-20 20:19:33+00:00
> Someone has to pay the developers.

Agreed. Although nobody ever mentions the 1,100+ developers that submitted PRs to Zed.

And yeah. I know what you mean. But this is the other side of the OSS coin. You accept free work from outside developers, and it will inevitably get forked because of an issue. But from my perspective, it's a great thing for the community. We're all standing on the shoulders of giants here.
by hatthew | 2025-08-20 20:19:35+00:00
I find it kinda scary that this is marketed as "zoom" and "recovering details", when the reality is that it quite literally makes stuff up and hopes you won't notice the difference. You and I know that it's completely fake, but we (or at least I) don't even know how much is faked, and probably 99% of people won't even know that it's fake at all.

How long until someone gets arrested because an AI invented a face that looks like theirs? Hopefully lawyers will be know to throw out evidence like that, but the social media hivemind will happily ruin someone's life based on AI hallucinations.
by WD-42 | 2025-08-20 20:19:53+00:00
You'd rather see another crappy, slow editor packaging an entire browser? Because that seems like what people are using for "cross platform toolkits" these days. I'm glad Zed is being ambitious, it's truly a joy to use because it feels native. And to be honest, it's Windows, who cares. If you are a developer you should have switched to Linux years ago anyway.
by xp84 | 2025-08-20 20:20:02+00:00
I started but haven't yet completed a project to use mkcert on a home server, and get all devices in the house to trust it as a CA for things such as printers and "internal tools" for my family such as Jellyfin, etc.

This would probably be easier if I was organized enough to use at least minimal MDM features on the family's devices though, so I haven't actually completed this project yet.
by com2kid | 2025-08-20 20:20:09+00:00
> It's less screen and less battery than a laptop,

Phones have higher resolution, higher refresh rate, and brighter screens at the price point vs a $1000 laptop. (Also higher density screens are harder to make, 12" 1080p panels cost nothing, phone screens are often bespoke resolutions.)

RAM is the same or higher at the $1k price point - 16GB.

Fewer ports sure, but most ports are USB-C anyway, the cost of the connector is not the expensive part.

The mechanical design I'll push back on as well, phones are expected to put up with a lot more physical abuse than laptops, and also be resistant to dust and water. You can dunk a pixel phone in 3 feet of water for half an hour, good luck doing that with a laptop. As someone who got to watch the ME's sitting next to my team work on making our product water resistant, that process sucks, it takes multiple iterations ($, and time) and it is non-trivial to get right.

Tear downs of the Pixel 10 are obv not available yet, but the estimated BOM for a Pixel 9 is ~$400 USD. Figure ongoing support (7 years!), all the cloud services that come with it, and all the other costs that went into making it (the army of engineers, an entire OS team, all the apps that come with it, etc), the $800 I paid for it isn't half bad.

Edit: Oh and phones also have a modern miracle of an RF stack in them. My phone can hold onto a BT connection across my yard and through 2 brick walls! And they do this with barely any space to but the antennas. Meanwhile laptops can run antennas willy-nilly with the absurd amount of volume they have to work with.

(Apple's Laptops also have really good wireless performance, but the base models aren't trying to support the three generations of cellular protocols and standard that phones do.)
by moefh | 2025-08-20 20:20:35+00:00
> At the very least its an indicator that atheist and superstition are a common combination.

The very least is even less than what I wrote: it's the smallest possible overlap between convinced atheists and fengshui believers: (47-(100-61)) = 8% of the population being both.

You can call it common if you want, but again I don't see how you'd get from that to anywhere near "the majority of atheists globally believe in astrology".
by porridgeraisin | 2025-08-20 20:20:56+00:00
After trying out 6000/7000mah phones, I'm never ever using any phone with a smaller battery. Especially not the 3580mah or whatever pixel phones. I like pixel otherwise, but it's just impossible to revert back to a smaller battery once you've experienced the truly multi-day -- even for a unhealthy screen user like me -- battery life.
by meghan | 2025-08-20 20:21:20+00:00
Seems similar to Apple's 2015 acquisition of FoundationDB -- they sunset the commercial offering. But it's unclear if they acquired Styra or just hired the team?

I'm maintaining an article about this news (as well as commercial alternatives to OPA) on the Oso blog: https://www.osohq.com/post/opa-maintainers-join-apple-oss-co...

Disclaimer is that I work with Oso :-) but hope it will be helpful regardless.
by bawolff | 2025-08-20 20:21:37+00:00
I stand by my previous comment.

You're angry you didn't get your way, but the googler's decision seems logical, i think most software developers maintaining a large software platform would have made a similar decision given the evidence presented (as evidenced by other web browsers making the same one).

The only difference here between most software is that google operates somewhat in the open. In the corporate world there would be some customer service rep to shield devs from the special interest group's tantrum.
by leshokunin | 2025-08-20 20:21:37+00:00
Been pondering for my team to use it for our product’s timeline. I don’t particularly want our user base to be Bluesky, but it’d be good to have support for the protocol, and control over the system.

Have there been any products go embraced this? Or is it like ActivityPub where basically the whole thing is Mastodon.
by jerf | 2025-08-20 20:21:47+00:00
There is known to be a number of superficially compelling proofs of the theorem that are incorrect. It has been conjectured that the reason why we don't have Fermat's proof anywhere is that between him writing the margin note and some hypothetical later recording of the supposed proof, he realized his simple proof was incorrect. And of course, saw no reason to "correct the historical record" for a simple margin annotation. This seems especially likely to me in light of the fact he published a proof for the case where n = 4, which means he had time to chew on the matter.
by glawrence13 | 2025-08-20 20:21:52+00:00
Love this! This is one of the key painpoints we're trying to solve. It takes building in the space to know how hard (/impossible) monetizing products on your site is, but we think once people try to do so, they'll end up building with Channel3!

Excited to hear about what you were building. If there's anything Channel3 can do to support, feel free to dm me at george@trychannel3.com.
by losvedir | 2025-08-20 20:21:55+00:00
Unless you're mailing letters, it's almost certain that your life is in "digital format". It sounds like you just don't use a calendar.

But surely you have an email confirmation for your movie, baseball, or event ticket. And maybe you texted or otherwise messaged with your friends who were going? Took pictures on your phone with them? Carried your phone with you when you went.
by skydhash | 2025-08-20 20:22:17+00:00
But so is a good book. And it costs way less. Even though searching may be quicker, having a good digest of a feature is worth the half hour I can spend browsing a chapter. It’s directly picking an expert brains. Then you take notes, compare what you found online and the updated documentation and soon you develop a real understanding of the language/tool abstraction.
by StopDisinfo910 | 2025-08-20 20:22:21+00:00
> prejudices are a funny thing

I don’t think people have prejudices here. Ocaml is Ocaml and F# is F#.

If your point is that people using OCaml should instead use F#, I vehemently disagree. That would be losing most of what makes Ocaml actually Ocaml.

Still F# is a nice language. F# without using .Net library I don’t see the point however. It’s the most interesting part of the language.
by cosmic_cheese | 2025-08-20 20:22:22+00:00
> So with that, this presents a HUGE opportunity for someone to build something akin to Zed, but not with the baggage that their technical strategy brings.

Not sure it’s so clean-cut. More than avoiding baggage, you’re just shifting it elsewhere. The question is if you want to own (and can handle) the baggage and benefit from the control that brings.
by hackrmn | 2025-08-20 20:22:25+00:00
I appreciate your response. I made a point of not revising my comment after posting it and finding in a subsequent parable the following, quoting:

> Each SM is broken up into 4 identical quadrants, which NVIDIA calls SM subpartitions, each containing a Tensor Core, 16k 32-bit registers, and a SIMD/SIMT vector arithmetic unit called a Warp Scheduler, whose lanes (ALUs) NVIDIA calls CUDA Cores.

And right after:

> CUDA Cores: each subpartition contains a set of ALUs called CUDA Cores that do SIMD/SIMT vector arithmetic.

So, to your defense and my shame -- you *did* do better than I was able to infer from first glance. And I can take absolutely no issue with a piece elaborating on originally "vague" sentence later on -- we need to read top to bottom, after all.

Much of the difficulty with laying out knowledge in written word is inherent constraints like choosing between deferring detail to "further down" at the expense of giving the "bird's eye view". I mean there is a reason writing is hard, technical writing perhaps more so, in a way. You're doing much better than a lot of other stuff I've had to learn with, so I can only thank you to have done as much as you already have.

To be more constructive still, I agree the border between clarity and utility isn't always clearly drawn. But I think you can think of it as a service to your readers -- go with precision I say -- if you really presuppose the reader should know SIMD, chances are they are able to grok a new definition like "SIMD lane" if you define it _once_ and _well_. You don't need to be "unwieldy" in repetition -- the first time may be hard but you only need to do it once.

I am rambling. I do believe there are worse and better ways to impart knowledge of the kind in writing, but I too obviously don't have the answers, so my criticism was in part inconstructive, just a sheer outcry of mild frustration once I started conflating things from the get go but before I decided to give it a more thorough read.

One last thing though: I always like when a follow-up article starts with a preamble along of "In the previous part of the series..." so new visitors can simultaneously become aware there's prior knowledge that may be assumed, _and_ navigate their way to desired point in the series, all the way to the start perhaps. That frees you from e.g. wanting to annotate abbreviations in every part, if you want to avoid doing that.
by neilv | 2025-08-20 20:22:41+00:00
> It isn't just a simple crop; Pro Res Zoom uses Tensor G5 and an all-new generative imaging model to intelligently recover and refine intricate details.

Unclear what "intelligently recover and refine" means here, and I'd like to make a request of people who might also be unclear yet influenced by this idea...

If you build features that sound like this into the image-capturing stage (from the user perspective), and your target users include serious photographers who care about authenticity, please be sure to make any kind of "generative"/inferencing of image details be optional.

And fall back to nth previous generation of sensor processing, autofocusing, and anti-shake technology -- where the compute still influences the images, but errs on the side of missing/fuzzy detail rather than fabrication.

Imagine the priorities of photojournalists as a category of user -- not only users who want appealing snapshots, selfies, or professional editorial fashion/lifestyle shoots.

There's still a place for consciously fabricating/enhancing/fixing in interactive post-processing, when you you choose to do it, and it's clear to you what is being done.