MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by snickerbockers | 2025-08-03 03:57:44+00:00
I agree, but the thing about the Epstein scandal is that just about any individual aspect of it could plausibly be a coincidence when examined in isolation. It's only when you look at the entire scandal at once that it becomes obvious something is seriously wrong due to the enormous piles of "coincidences" this man leaves in his wake everywhere he goes.
by gucci-on-fleek | 2025-08-03 03:57:58+00:00
> I was aware that there are workarounds, but to me that defeats one of the core tenants of IPv6, which is that we're supposed to be doing away with this NAT and NAT-like nonsense by giving everything a globally rotatable IP.

The nice thing with IPv6 is that devices have no problem with being assigned multiple addresses on the same interface. So most of my devices actually have 5 IPv6 addresses [0]: a globally-routable DHCPv6 address (the default), a globally-routable SLAAC address, a ULA DHCPv6 address, a ULA SLAAC address, and a link-local address. So you can have a globally-routable IP and a locally-stable IP at the same time. And this is arguably a good thing, since it would be annoying to have to renumber your local network if you ever changed ISPs.

> I ran across several posts from various folks stating they could only get a /64 from Comcast no matter what they tried, so I'm not sure how universally supported DHCPv6-PD requests are.

That's annoying, and also means that you probably won't be able to get NPT to work either. FWIW, both Shaw and Telus (in Canada) will assign you a /56 via DHCPv6-PD if you request it.

[0]: I don't actually want this many addresses, but a link-local address is required for IPv6, I want my devices to have constant/easily-memorable IP addresses so I need DHCPv6, Android only supports SLAAC so I have to keep that enabled too, devices will prefer IPv4 over a v6 ULA so I need to keep the globally-routable addresses, and I want to use static addresses in my LAN so I need ULA enabled as well.
by margalabargala | 2025-08-03 03:58:18+00:00
To be fair, the main reason for this is that the CEO of Tesla looked at "people who buy electric vehicles", and spent the last four years turning himself into a caricature of a villain to those people.

At the best maybe it was some sort of misguided attempt to encourage the American right to buy EVs?

If so it royally backfired and just decimated his own customer base right at the time real competition was entering the market. The Equinox EV roundly beats the Model Y head to head on range, price, AWD, etc. The Ioniq 5 is more expensive but is lovely.
by ziofill | 2025-08-03 03:58:19+00:00
About 20 years ago I used to volunteer for CICAP, the Italian skeptics society. One year we had a big convention with lots of cool speakers. Obviously also some weirdos with wacky ideas showed up at the venue. I will always remember how Marino, one of the senior members, used to interact with them: he didn’t take them seriously, but he made them feel heard. I bet many of them came ready for a “fight” (or to be ridiculed) and they found enough respect to be content and leave in peace.
by joe_the_user | 2025-08-03 03:59:33+00:00
Yeah, it's extremely hard to get to a serious scientific discussion when field of "ufology" is so filled with grifters.

The main problem I'd see with CSICOP isn't dismissing alien visitor out-of-hand but rather tarring ideas that are merely unusual with the brush of crankdom - for example, I think Martin Gardener was attacking Alfred Korzybsky long ago. I'm not a Korzybskyite but I think his ideas are in no way tied to any super-natural or extra-scientific assertions.
by yjftsjthsd-h | 2025-08-03 04:00:19+00:00
> I suspect the thinking is that all of IPv4 could have been a contained within the IPv6 space. Perhaps at at the very beginning or very end of it.

They actually went with 64:ff9b::/96 as the default (though IPv6 is so big that you can just pick another area if you want in ULA space or whatever).

> Any time you would reference an IPv4 address when v6 enabled, the stack would simply fill in the remaining bits and forward your packets down the line.

There are actually multiple implementations, depending on OS and whether you want it in kernel space or user space.

> This had to have been thought about though, and I suspect the architects of v6 felt it would've been sub-par to what we have. No idea if that's true though.

They thought about it, named it NAT64 ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NAT64 ), published it, and it's in wide use. It frequently is combined with 464XLAT ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPv6_transition_mechanism#464X... ) to make the transition mostly invisible to users/applications.
by DiabloD3 | 2025-08-03 04:02:07+00:00
The taskbar exists in its own timeline, apparently. (Ex-)Microsoft engineers working in the UI/UX team for Windows itself have spoken about how much of a nightmare dealing with that thing was.

Also, the taskbar technically exists as a dll, not an exe, explorer.exe would link to it and run it if it was being ran as the UI shell. This is now split out to its own exe (Shell Experience Host iirc), and explorer.exe is now only File Explorer.

Since it exists as a dll, btw, this is how the Win10 taskbar injectors work, they just call the dll (which still ships in Win11) instead of letting Shell Experience Host do the Win11 thing.

The sane way of handling this, btw, is just use Shell Experience Host injectors to get the desired behaviors, such as using Windhawk and use m417z's taskbar height and icon size plugin (the third most popular Windhawk plugin); to match Vista/7 era small, set to height 32, icon size 16, taskbar button width 28.
by gucci-on-fleek | 2025-08-03 04:02:16+00:00
Yeah, this is the constant problem with IPv6: it's a much better design than IPv4, it's simpler to understand, and it should be theoretically much easier to use, but the tooling is all so terrible that it's often easier to just use IPv4. Which is too bad, because so many of the problems with IPv4 completely go away when you use IPv6, but right now we're stuck with dual-stack, which just doubles the amount of work to set everything up.
by trane_project | 2025-08-03 04:02:44+00:00
So the reason some kids seem to read with some instruction, even if it's not formal and super explicit, is that they have a good phonemic system. That is, they quickly understand that words are made up of smaller units (e.g. cat is /k/ + /a/ + /t/) and can manipulate them without much trouble. That ability is essential to map words efficiently in long term memory for effortlessly retrieval, which in turns creates a sight vocabulary (a large bank of words that are instantly recognized).

Kids with phonemic deficits, on the other hand, cannot efficiently develop a sight vocabulary. Even if they are taught phonics and can decode, that decoding is effortful and leaves little room for more complex tasks.
by mandevil | 2025-08-03 04:03:10+00:00
IPO valuation is pretty much always set to undervalue so it gets a good pop(1). The market cap after 90 days of trading (generally speaking when insiders lock-up provisions expire and there is no longer a limit on the number of shares that can be sold) is a much better estimate of the actual value of the company. We don't have that yet, but right now the stock is ~3x the valuation that Adobe was going to buy at. Every equity owner is currently booking this as a win. We'll see what the price is when the lock-out provisions end, but right now definitely the shareholders are glad that they didn't merge.

I know that because if the metric you cite was something that the investors and managers cared about, they could have done other things to boost it (see footnote 1). They didn't, ergo they don't consider that metric to be a useful gauge of the company value. It sure looks like you tried to find the worst performing metric to claim that there was a loss, when so far this has been a major win for the shareholders(2).

1: If you don't want this and want to IPO at the highest valuation, you do a direct listing like Spotify did, or a SPAC reverse merger like Trump Media did. But there are reasons that the vast majority of companies choose to do a traditional IPO. For most companies, this is a one-time transaction that will make the managers very very rich, and they want to get the best guidance on navigating it- and are willing to pay handsomely for that guidance, since this is the only time in their lives they will be CEO for a major company that is starting to list. So they follow the IPO/greenshoes/pop route.

2: The most important nuance on that statement is that it took them a year and a half to extract that extra value by doing an IPO, and now they are exposed to market risk. We will have to see what the market conditions are like in another few months when the lock-ups expire.
by toast0 | 2025-08-03 04:03:54+00:00
Suspend (to disk) is valuable in itself, separate from sleep.

Everybody has preferences, but if I put a laptop in a bag, I want it suspended. Everything should be as it was when I left. Not doing whatever wakeups I might be happy with if it's sleeping on my desk.

Also immensely valuable for desktops on UPS. Run for a while, then suspend until power comes back. The UPS battery will not run for very many minutes, even if there is very little load.
by aurareturn | 2025-08-03 04:04:22+00:00
1. Figma actually lost money because their acquisition price was higher than their shares sold in the IPO.

2. Yes, Figma luckily IPOed in an extremely hot market

Getting a bit lucky doesn't mean this was a success overall. The conclusion has many more years to go before it gets written. Either way, I don't like the over reach by Lina Khan.
by booleandilemma | 2025-08-03 04:05:15+00:00
Bike lanes are kinda scary in nyc though, because bikers usually refuse to stop for red lights, creating a hazard for pedestrians.

I once saw a biker yell at a pedestrian to get out of the way, even though she was the one who was going through a red light.

More than once I've seen a biker almost plow into someone trying to cross the street.
by genocidicbunny | 2025-08-03 04:08:02+00:00
This is speaking from my experiences when I was young.

> My kids and other kids in the neighborhood close by play around in the cul-de-sac quite often. Lots of people are out walking around. A lot of neighbors have patio furniture in their front yard and can be found out there, at least when its not 100F+ outside.

How big is the cul-de-sac? When I was a kid, my 'local neighborhood cul-de-sac' was about 50 kids playing around, forming their own little cliques, learning how to interact with a lot of other different kids. The actual cul-de-sac was more like 200-300 families with kids of varying ages, all interacting with each other

>The downtown area nearby has lots of events going on.

How many are spontaneous and unorganized? How often does the local band drop by for an impromptu performance that you didn't need to plan for, find parking for...that you could just be out walking your dog and stop by for a half hour?

> I hung out at the farmer's market this morning that's routinely held in town most weeks on Saturday mornings. Lots of people walking/biking to it.

How much of the market is just your average stay-at-home that is selling their extra produce to make some extra cash and avoid it going to waste? Do you need to sign up to be a seller, or can you just show up, set up at an empty stall and sell your stuff?

> My suburban town has 42 of them. Almost 2,000 acres. They're mostly connected by dedicated bike paths. There's a city park attached to nearly every neighborhood area. Down the street from me there's a park with multiple playground areas, walking path through some small woods, a fishing pond, some basic sports areas (fences and graveled areas for baseball/softball, space for soccer, etc). So yeah, plenty of parks to be had. And there's usually a good bit of people at these places.

Wow, 2000 acres...thats, not a whole lot. My hometown had something like 200mi^2 of public land around it that you could just go and make use of. And that's just in easy walking distance.

> Pools, farmers stands, churches, library...

My hometown had all of these a plenty too, and they weren't all heavily regimented. And by most measures, you probably lived in what was an ivory palace compared to where I came from. Yet, from your descriptions, you can't even manage the most destitute period of the post-soviet-collapse period.

We had plenty of third places to gather around with other people. Parks, beaches, forests. The biggest difference to me was that our experiences weren't sanitized. They weren't regimented to respond to certain rules, to be calendarized to occur on certain days or times. Our parents didn't need to plan play dates, or so schedule time off to make sure their kids could experience certain things. Those were just a given. The American experience with this is, speaking from 30-ish years of experience, is very lacking, and the saddest part is that most don't realize that.
by agentultra | 2025-08-03 04:08:32+00:00
I work on a Haskell codebase that is close to or over a million lines of code. It’s a bear to work with for a number of reasons but inflexibility to changes in business logic isn’t one of them. People need to stop waving their hands and running around claiming that the sky is falling.

Try writing some Haskell for a while.

Explore the compiler output. If you can ignore the language runtime it’s pretty reasonable. Good, even. There are a lot of cases where GHC can optimize away a lot of things you might think are unreasonable by reading the surface language.
by adastra22 | 2025-08-03 04:08:46+00:00
EC2 services aren't tied to a machine, just a region. The details of what machine to instantiate a VM on, or the details of moving a VM between hosts, attaching remote drives over IP, or handling the networking that makes this all possible, that was worked out by Amazon to host Amazon.com, which they then resold as a service under the banner AWS. The pieces were there, but not a unified "cloud" architecture.

This is smelling like the classic "Dropbox isn't anything new" HN comment.

TODAY amazon services are just re-packaged OSS packages, yes. That wasn't the case before.
by DiabloD3 | 2025-08-03 04:09:35+00:00
Windows Terminal is sort of a clusterfuck of multiple programs, only one of which is a UWP program (the actual visible WinUI shell that runs) which you're not allowed to do as a UWP-era Microsoft Store app, but they got internal permission to do that.

Its now a WinUI 3.x program, apparently, and now the Store no longer requires UWP programs, so WT now only needs to make the "ships inside of Windows release images" guys happy, which apparently is harder than making the UWP-era Store guys happy.
by giardini | 2025-08-03 04:09:43+00:00
hirvi74says >"1. The inconsistency of the English language makes it so phonics is limited after a certain number of words, and then memorization and context must be used. For example, take words like cough, rough, through, though, etc. or words like read, lead, wound, etc. Not to mention all the silent letters we have too."<

In grade school English class, our teacher raised as examples "cough", "rough", "through", "though", etc.(i.e., all the "ough" words). She pointed out that sometimes words are inconsistent with phonics.

I became annoyed and complained about the inconsistency. Her response (to me and the class) was straightforward: phonics wasn't exact and some parts of speaking and reading must be memorized. But she also pointed out that everybody else had learned it as a child and that we would too, which was a pretty convincing argument. Within a few days the desire for a foolish consistency evaporated as we advanced through our reading assignments, slaughtering armies of text before us.

English words are composed of characters from a phonetic alphabetic. In Chinese each word is a unique character. So there is no phonics system for Chinese.
by xelxebar | 2025-08-03 04:11:45+00:00
> either locality fails of realism fails

Or statistical independence fails, no? The CHSH derivation, for example, requires commuting expectation value with conjunction and similar for other Bell-like's that I'm aware of.

This always gets pooh-poohed away with with vague appeals to absurdism, "Alice and Bob's free will blah blah", but I don't really know of a priori reasons why the global state space needs to be Hilbert instead of a more complicated manifold with some Bell-induced metric. If you know of prior art here, I'd love some pointers.
by Nevermark | 2025-08-03 04:12:01+00:00
If we take the Bitter Lesson very seriously, it means that AI won't navigate byzantine organizations better than humans. It will replace the byzantine organizations of humans.

Trying to train it to do what humans do, working with each other, when they navigate a company they designed (by plan and happenstance), to achieve a spaghetti plate of objectives, is just another attempt at putting humans between data and performance.

Only broad goals, i.e. revenues up, costs down, profits rising sustainably, no lost legal cases ... needed.

Using the hodgepodge of measures traditionally used to (try to) track intermediate human performances? ...would be just another attempt at putting humans between data and performance.
by bbor | 2025-08-03 04:12:24+00:00
I'm not a conspiracy person, but it's hard not to believe that some cruel god sent us crypto just a few years before we accidentally achieved AGI just to mess with us. So many people are confident that AGI is impossible and LLMs are a passing fad based to a large degree on the idea that SV isn't trustworthy -- I'd probably be there too, if I wasn't in the field myself. It's a hard pattern not to recognize, even if n~=2.5 at most!

I hope for all of our sake's that you're right. I feel confident that you're not :(
by stephenhuey | 2025-08-03 04:13:55+00:00
Houstonian here. I’m guessing you’re in Plano. I’ve been all over Texas: cities, suburbs, small towns and many relatives’ and friends’ farms. I’ve also been to most U.S. states and several continents. What you’re describing is such an outlier that’s it literally sounds like a diamond in the rough. While there is hopefully a new trend among American planners to make this more of a reality for more Americans in the decades to come, for many years to come not more than a tiny fraction of Americans will experience what you’re enjoying. Until then, the most common American experience will be to hop in a car to do almost anything. And again, in most corners of Texas and the country, I have rarely seen people sitting on their front porches talking to people passing by - that seems to be a relic of stories I’ve read taking place in certain towns in the early 20th century. But I should come check out your area!
by DiabloD3 | 2025-08-03 04:14:25+00:00
UWP most certainly did not exist when WinRT came into existence. WinRT, itself, is also more or less the third version of this attempt: Managed C++ came first, then C++/CLI, then the WinRT era and C++/CX.

C++/CLI and C++/CX are semi-managed, you only need to use the extensions when interacting with WinRT, although you're free to write your entire app in that dialect.
by cmrx64 | 2025-08-03 04:15:03+00:00
What’s mathematically questionable about the quotient soundness axiom? It’s justifiable metamathematically. What’s the real difference baking it into the proof kernel? I’d rather such independent properties be modeled as an axiom. The quotient automation I’m familiar with in other theorem provers is typically way more (untrusted!) machinery than just stating quot.sound.
by bkettle | 2025-08-03 04:16:12+00:00
Are you referring to the Jersey City mention when you say counterexample? It’s excellent and absolutely worth celebrating that a US city was able to achieve this for a year, but just like Helsinki’s car-use stats, it was also no fluke: not only is Jersey City in the most transit-friendly metro area in the country (NYC), but they’ve also had a huge focus on trying to achieve vision zero and (unlike many other cities who claim to also be trying to achieve vision zero) have been aggressively implementing changes to street design that improve safety and encourage non-car modes of transport, often by slowing down cars [1, 2].

And unfortunately, Jersey City had deaths on their city roads again in 2023 and 2024 [3]. We need to be doing everything we can to study places that are doing things well, because we have a long way to go.

1. https://apnews.com/article/hoboken-zero-traffic-deaths-dayli... 2. https://youtu.be/gwu1Cf8G9u8?si=2WWsj5EvTs8CTU8T 3. https://cdnsm5-hosted.civiclive.com/UserFiles/Servers/Server...
by jaredsohn | 2025-08-03 04:16:19+00:00
>maybe in the future vibe coding will actually work

Vibe coding works today at small enough of scale.

I'm building a personal app to help me track nutrition and I only needed to get involved in the code when Claude would hit its limits for a single file and produced a broken program (and this was via the UI, not Claude Code.) Now at ~3000 lines of python.

After I told it to split it into a few files I don't think I've had to talk about anything at the code level. Note that I eventually did switch to using Claude Code which might have helped (gets annoying copy/pasting multiple files and then my prompts hit max limits).

I just prompt it like an experienced QA/product person to tell it how to build it, point out bugs (as experienced as a user), point out bad data, etc.

A few of my recent prompts (each is a separate prompt):

>for foods found but not in database, list the number of times each shows up

>sort the list by count descending

>Period surplus/deficit seems too low. looking at 2025/07/24 to 2025/07/31

>do not require beige color (but still track it). combine blue/purple as one in stats (but keep separate colors). data has both white and White; should use standard case and not show as two colors
by bccdee | 2025-08-03 04:17:36+00:00
> It's fine to encode rules directly into the type system, but only for rules that are known to be fixed (or at least not likely to ever change) throughout the lifetime of the project.

But then you lose the benefits a type system offers during refactoring. When business logic does change, if it's linked to the type system, then the logic is forced to change consistently throughout your system.

Of course, you don't want to be forced to change all your code whenever any business logic changes. But you never are. Basic separation of concerns should ensure that different pieces of logic are coupled to different types, such that the blast radius of any type change is limited.

Consider the example from the article, where the PaymentStatus type winds up with a whole bunch of variants. Code that deals with the status of a payment really needs to know all the different statuses a payment could have. If you add a PendingApproval variant to PaymentStatus, your refund workflow should break, because it needs to know to cancel the approval process without issuing a payment when the order is still pending approval. Meanwhile, code that doesn't deal with payments directly can treat that type as a black box.
by slashitapp | 2025-08-03 04:17:56+00:00
Slashit’s Summarize This Update Generator helps Business Ops Managers turn chaotic meeting notes or long Slack threads into crystal-clear summaries with AI.

Fill in key fields → Generate final update Professional, polished tone — every time

Try Slashit App for free → www.slashit.app

#BusinessOps #SlackWorkflow #AItools #Slashit