MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by oezi | 2025-08-27 09:42:42+00:00
Edit: maybe I need to investigate this again because it isn't working for me. In a usual month I downloaded pytorch through UV maybe 100 times.

Not true, each virtual environment has its own physical copy on disk.

Since creating venvs is usually per project you have many downloads / copies.

See: https://github.com/astral-sh/uv/issues/1495
by orwin | 2025-08-27 09:43:14+00:00
I kinda like the simulation hypothesis. We have 3 cases: either it is impossible to simulate the universe because of a natural law we haven't discovered yet; or it is possible but civilizations collapse before reaching that point; or it is possible and reachable, and in that case, we extremely likely to live in a simulation. 1 and 3 are the most likely imho.

To me, it's a 40% chance we do live in a simulation, but the way I weigh the different scenarios is extremely personal.
by AnthonyMouse | 2025-08-27 09:43:36+00:00
> Emulating Android sufficiently well enough to run Android apps is a decent start, but so many apps rely on Play Services and Play Integrity that it's a losing battle, or at best a cat-and-mouse game to keep things working.

This is where antitrust laws are supposed to come into play. Play Services are a pain but in principle you can implement alternatives to them. It's the attestation stuff which is aggressively anti-competitive -- literally setting up a system with the primary function of excluding competing implementations from compatibility.

We can't let corporations get away with the fraud that competing with them is a security vulnerability.
by cyco130 | 2025-08-27 09:44:30+00:00
For six years I worked in a SaaS startup that built an applicant tracking system (a tool to manage recruitment efforts in big/mid-sized companies) tailored for the local market of the country we lived in. My experience tells me that our main value was in forcing them to rethink their recruitment processes, not adapting to their existing ones that were usually all over the place.

As much as I want to believe the opposite to be true as a “power user”, good tools often force you to adopt better practices, not the other way around.
by rlpb | 2025-08-27 09:44:37+00:00
This process only works when you're hiring for an entry-level role and also don't care about differentiating for anything that isn't on your exam.

I don't think it's possible to create such an exam for senior or leadership roles, where a candidate's (professional) background is the key differentiator. Say you have two candidates for a C-suite role. One was formerly with company X and demonstrates A, B and C attributes. The other was formerly with company Y and demonstrates D, E and F attributes. How would you have created an exam that differentiated between the two, without the benefit of hindsight?
by aurareturn | 2025-08-27 09:44:40+00:00
Mad rulers are also quite normal for much of human history, the theory was that Democracy would relieve us of that particular problem.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uqsBx58GxYY

This is one of the most insightful videos I've ever seen on society and governments. It describes Anacyclosis, where political systems evolve in a recurring sequence driven by corruption and decay.

Democracy will eventually decay. It's not permanent. You can see it now live where democracies elect more and more radical leaders.
by tremon | 2025-08-27 09:45:00+00:00
"Government overreach" by a private corporation? Let's see what wikipedia has to say about that:

> A fascist corporation can be defined as a government-directed confederation of employers and employees unions, with the aim of overseeing production in a comprehensive manner.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporatism#Fascist_corporatis...

Google goes even further than that: they do not only control and oversee all production via the Play Store, they also control all usage of their products. And while it may currently not be government-directed, they certainly are government-protected as long as they're allowed to run the only app store in town.
by sim7c00 | 2025-08-27 09:45:00+00:00
this is pretty nice. if u need to scan tons of places for large ranges (discovery all pvt ranges every timeframe) this can be really nice.

the problem i have with such scanners is accuracy though. but i suppose thats hard to tackle from scanner perspective (hard to see routing tricks etc.). for asset/vuln mgmt its good to have full disco scans to compare other sources and see if they cover everything with targeted scans. personally i wouldnt care much about banners in this case as other tools will do more aggressive fingerprinting.

a push back on scanning full 10./8 or such ranges was for me always time needed / bandwidth (idiots running full feature scan instead of pings... -_-)

with that landscape in mind id say maybe position yourself clearly in the discovery bucket, not finger printing, or make it clear different scan profiles. if u start about banner grabbing ppl might either expect slowdowns or expect full banners for everything.

maybe its nice to make little scripts. your json into ansible inventory. RackTables maybe and NetBox? or in some format those accept. it will help adoption a lot.
by Dylan16807 | 2025-08-27 09:45:01+00:00
You can learn about a scene without thinking they're competent.

It doesn't really prove war for oil, war tends to mess up production and also we have a huge amount of domestic production. But that depends on what exactly the claims are.

"Free energy" doesn't exist so that just goes back to them barking up the wrong tree. It's taking a real villain and blaming them for nonsense instead of something they actually do.
by chii | 2025-08-27 09:45:44+00:00
> A lot of people who voted right wing are looking for reasons to re-evaluate their decisions

i dont believe this to be the case. If they have such a reason, then surely they would've already examined it much earlier and came to a conclusion under which they won't have been a right wing voter in the first place.

So there's something else at play, such as preconceived notions, or the inability to sort out facts from fiction (being presented as fact on TV), that makes them behave the way they did.
by Lio | 2025-08-27 09:46:02+00:00
I'm definitely in favour of gradual typing but runtime checking is already really easy to do if that's what you want. Just add a rightward assignment patten match to your method. e.g.

def somemethod(foo, bar) foo => Integer bar => MyBarClass end

Personally I think the RBS-Inine format is the way forward. Sorbet has experimental support for it too.

https://sorbet.org/docs/rbs-support
by melvinroest | 2025-08-27 09:46:18+00:00
You can argue both sides right? It makes business sense for oil money to do that.

However, there's also a trend that giant corporations are kind of like giant oil tankers (no pun intended). It takes a humongous amount of energy to change a company's fundamental core business. Oil companies are in the business of oil. Even if they expand to becoming an energy company, it takes a long time for them to change their "oil DNA". Based on that, I can imagine that certain oil companies - though not all oil companies - elect to maintain the status quo.

I don't think this is unique to big oil. It's unique to big {pharma, tech, oil, *}. What I find harder to find out is what the "weights" are for both sides and how they are influenced.
by maxlin | 2025-08-27 09:46:20+00:00
I'm absolutely against this and for similar reasons have boycotted Apple for my entire life on hard ideological grounds, but not everything is "fascist" lol. Don't misuse the term.

In any case, I hope this blows up in Google's face hard, ROMs like LineageOS become as popular they were back in their heyday, and root hiders get extra attention too so banking apps etc work seamlessly as on non-rooted phones. Requiring some developer ID crap is essentially as bad as Apple has it, reason for which I've always considered developers having Apple phones quite unserious.
by jimkleiber | 2025-08-27 09:46:22+00:00
> Sometimes you have to explain that thing a lot.

This.

Sometimes I think I want people to change their minds extremely and instantaneously. When I look at the micro-changes they make, and have the endurance to see these changes over time, they can actually make extreme changes and in a short period of time. It's just rarely instantaneously extreme.
by jacquesm | 2025-08-27 09:47:06+00:00
> Luckily US constitution says a president cannot serve more than 2 terms. He's going to try but I don't think the public will allow him.

The constitution is no longer the pillar it used to be, and if the public didn't act so far I don't think they ever will. You'd have expected nationwide strikes by now a-la Poland 1982, the movement was called Solidarity for a reason. But in a nation full of individualists it is much harder to get something like that rolling.

> That said, it wouldn't surprise me if he tried to start a world war in order to try to stay as president. It seems like he'll literally do anything to stay in power. Last time he tried to get a mob to kill the vice president and congress. What's he going to do in 3 years?

This is the million dollar question. Some points of hope: he may not be around in three years, some voices are being heard that push back.

But there may be a successor with similarly deranged ideas and the people that are getting a taste of real power around them may want to consolidate their position knowing full well that if they don't succeed now they most likely never will.

US-Europe and US-Canada relationships will take decades to heal though, if they ever will, no matter what the outcome.
Are we the ulimate form of AGI?
by TrietNg | 2025-08-27 09:47:17+00:00
Don't think I'm silly, but I've been thinking about this a lot lately. Many of us are familiar with simulation theory, which suggests that we could be living in a simulated reality created by a more advanced civilization. If this is true, then we were "artificially" created in a sense.

So, if our technology continues to advance, we might one day be able to create a new human—not literally from scratch, but by simulating a conscious being. When you consider that possibility, it's worth thinking about whether we ourselves are a form of AGI.

What is your opinion? I'm open to discussion.
by tumetab1 | 2025-08-27 09:48:26+00:00
For those paying attention, NGOs supported by the EU are good example.

Here's a news link https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2025/01/23/use-of-eu-fund...

I don't have time/will to find more consolidating information but some EU-Elites regularly use NGOs to support their own policy goals, against member states governments and their populations. They always excuse themselves by saying they fund everyone... but one side of the issue usually gets more funds than the other.

If I recall correctly in one "EU wants to monitor the internet" regulations, EU directly funded targeted AD campaigns to convinced some Member state populations to support it so the government would change its intended vote. They were caught and backed off. Then they funded some NGO to do it :D
by autoexec | 2025-08-27 09:48:27+00:00
> They choose iOS because it's locked down and thus they cannot inadvertently do something they don't understand, and can't be bothered to learn. More importantly, their grandmother cannot do something she doesn't understand but scammers persuade her to do.

For what it's worth scammers have zero problems scamming grandmothers with Apple computers and iphones.
by dspillett | 2025-08-27 09:48:42+00:00
> The issue, …, is that proper safeguarding would require a lots more GPU resource, …

I think the issue is that with current tech is simply isn't possible to do that well enough at all⁰.

> even then its not a given that it would be reliable.

I think it is a given that it won't be reliable. AGI might make it reliable enough, where “good enough” here is “no worse than a trained human is likely to manage, given the same information”. It is something that we can't do nearly as well as we might like, and some are expecting a tech still in very active development¹ to do it.

> However it'll never be attempted because its too expensive and would hurt growth.

Or that they know it is not possible with current tech so they aren't going to try until the next epiphany that might change that turns up in a commercially exploitable form. Trying and failing will highlight the dangers, and that will encourage restrictions that will hurt growth.³ Part of the problem with people trusting it too much already, is that the big players have been claiming safeguards _are_ in place and people have naïvely trusted that, or hand-waved the trust issue for convenience - this further reduces the incentive to try because it means admitting that current provisions are inadequate, or prior claims were incorrect.

----

[0] both in terms of catching the cases to be concerned about, and not making it fail in cases where it could actually be positively useful in its current form (i.e. there are cases where responses from such tools have helped people reason their way out of a bad decision, here giving the user what they wanted was very much a good thing)

[1] ChatGPT might be officially “version 5” now, but away from some specific tasks it all feels more like “version 2”² on the old “I'll start taking it seriously somewhere around version 3” scale.

[2] Or less…

[3] So I agree with your final assessment of why they won't do that, but from a different route!
by danhau | 2025-08-27 09:49:02+00:00
I don't know what your code is doing exactly. For comparison, here's my utf8 decoder (for a single codepoint):

static UnicodeCodepoint utf8_decode(u8 const bytes[static 4], u8 *out_num_consumed) { u8 const flipped = ~bytes[0]; if (flipped == 0) { // Because __builtin_clz is UB for value 0. // When his happens, the UTF-8 is malformed. *out_num_consumed = 1; return 0; } u8 const num_ones = __builtin_clz(flipped) & 0x07; u8 const num_bytes_total = num_ones > 1 ? num_ones : 1; u8 const main_byte_shift = num_ones + 1; UnicodeCodepoint value = bytes[0] & (0xFF >> main_byte_shift); for (u8 i = 1; i < num_bytes_total; ++i) { if (bytes[i] >> 6 != 2) { // Not a valid continuation byte. *out_num_consumed = i; return 0; } value = (value << 6) | (bytes[i] & 0x3F); } *out_num_consumed = num_bytes_total; return value; }
by aurareturn | 2025-08-27 09:49:33+00:00
nuclear umbrella would be a choice between Russia (practically impossible)

Would be one of the bigger plot twists in history. I wouldn't rule it out. I think it has a decent chance of happening. Maybe 10%?

Let's say the Russia/Ukraine war is over. Russia mends its ties with Europe and says it will be good from now on. The US is ready to annex Greenland. Denmark is powerless and will lose Greenland. Russia calls Denmark and says it can help. If you're Denmark, what would you do?
by Notatheist | 2025-08-27 09:51:44+00:00
>and the reviews on the whole seem excellent

I detest this take because Adam would have probably reviewed the interactions that lead to his death as excellent. Getting what you want isn't always a good thing. That's why therapy is so uncomfortable. You're told things you don't want to hear. To do things you don't want to do. ChatGPT was built to do the opposite and this is the inevitable outcome.
by ZaoLahma | 2025-08-27 09:51:59+00:00
Replace the "hire poor developers" with "use LLM driven development", and you have the rough outline for a perfect Software Engineering horror movie.

It used to be that the poor performers (dangerous hip-shootin' code commitin' cowpokes) were limited in the amount of code that they could produce per time unit, leaving enough time for others to correct course. Now the cowpokes are producing ridiculous amount of code that you just can't keep up with.
by defrost | 2025-08-27 09:52:01+00:00
One version, frequently bandied about, is the excerpt from Landman, a recent fictional TV drama (5 minutes): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fmbZwxEnAFc

There is, of course, a debunking video response (14 minutes): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oKVNFqqzvP4

NIMBYism (destroying the beautiful views from my golf course) and "Think of the birds" also feature high on the list.
by sneak | 2025-08-27 09:52:21+00:00
We wait. Trump is not in great health and he’s quite old, and constitutional term limits will have him out in a few years.

In case he tries another coup, one thing you could do is organize and obtain arms (and train with them) and have you and your group, as well as any other groups you can muster, near DC around late January 2029. The rule of law cannot be taken for granted.

There is only one language that tyrants speak.
by misja111 | 2025-08-27 09:52:57+00:00
I worked for them in the early 2000's. There was nothing wrong with the people working there, except for the two founders, a father and son. They were absolutely ruthless. And as so often, that ruthless mentality was what enabled them to gain dominance over the market. I could tell some crazy stories about how they ran the company but better not because it might get me sued. But if you understand Dutch, you can read more about them e.g. here: https://www.quotenet.nl/zakelijk/a41239366/chipsoft-gerrit-h...
by closewith | 2025-08-27 09:53:28+00:00
Okay, so you're grasping at straws here, because:

a) a Refund Not Processed chargeback is for non-compliance with card network rules,

and b), When the merchant informed the cardholder of its refund policy at the time of purchase, the cardholder must abide by that policy.

We won these every time, because we had a lawful and compliant refund policy and we stuck to it. These are a complete non-issue for vendors outside the US, unless they are genuinely fraudulent.

Honestly, I think you have no experience with card processors outside the US (or maybe at all) and you just can't admit you're wrong, but anyone with experience would tell you how wrong you are in a heartbeat. The idea you can "defeat" geoblocks with chargebacks is much more likely to result in you losing access to credit than a refund.
by cjk | 2025-08-27 09:53:50+00:00
We manage mise itself via homebrew. Sometimes when upgrading mise itself, it doesn’t seem to handle being upgraded gracefully, and loses track of installed runtimes even if we manually kick it in our upgrade scripts. Restarting the shell entirely seems to be the only way to fix it.

That, and with Ruby, Node, and at least one other language/tool IIRC, when support for those things moved internal, we had to make a bunch of changes to our scripts to handle that change with effectively no warning. That involved checking to see if the third-party plug-in was installed, uninstalling it if so, and then installing the language based on the built-in support. In the meantime, the error messages encountered were not super helpful in understanding what was going on.

I’m hopeful that these types of issues are behind us now that most of the things we care about are internal, but still, it’s been pretty annoying.
by autoexec | 2025-08-27 09:53:56+00:00
> There are 150 million Nintendo Switches in the world, and nobody has figured out how to jailbreak one without getting into the hardware and shorting some wires (and even then only on early unpatched models).

It's is acceptable for the hack to be difficult so long as it exists. I'm sure later models will eventually be jailbroken too. In the meantime, all of nintendo's best efforts haven't ended the piracy of switch games which is what the vast majority of people care about, not getting their favorite linux distro to run on the hardware itself.
by vintagedave | 2025-08-27 09:54:16+00:00
I don't personally believe we should support Grok. There are plenty of models and AI companies out there: whether it's the lawsuit to get on the front page of the Apple App Store or the glorification of Hitler, none of what Grok or X AI has done is good. There is zero need to use or support this company at all, in any way.

Let's not give them any money. And if Cursor supports them, let's not give _Cursor_ any money. This is a hard no from me.
by justanotherjoe | 2025-08-27 09:54:16+00:00
This is in line with what I've heard a few times before. It's like self induced psychosis sometimes.

Anyway, your whole world being inside your mind is self-evident to me. That is what the superego is, partly. An integrity model/simulacrum of the outside world. We have it so we can run simulations and outcomes without actually being 'reported' and judged in reality.

Anyway, i thought it is interesting. My theory is that psychedelics allow us to update these integrity models which usually maintains its integrity by being outside of our control. Since it's usually lagging behind our developing worldview and needs.
by nathan_compton | 2025-08-27 09:54:18+00:00
The observer/observed thing is present in every part of physics and isn't really about observers but about where we choose to draw the line between one physical system and another (with the other usually containing ourselves).

Think of it this way: classically or quantum mechanically, when we pick out a physical system to talk about we are isolating the terms for that system in the universal lagrangian and assuming that in the time of interest that the terms for our physical system couple weakly to the rest of the universe (which happens to contain us).

In principal nothing really weird is going on here and in classical mechanics the idea is totally trivial as far as it goes. On short time scales with appropriately sized actions the deviation from the isolated system and the real system (which is weakly coupled to the world) can be demonstrated to be small as long as the coupling is small.

In quantum mechanics two things complicate this situation. The first is that quantum mechanical systems sort of defy separation into distinct subsets except in special situations. Classically there is a strong sense in which we can point to two different parts of a system and call them separate, but quantum mechanically we really only know how to time evolve _the whole system_ and from a mathematical point of view its the actual object of interest. This is what we are getting at when we talk about entanglement: the two spin 1/2 particles flying away from one another in Bell style experiments are not separate things in the QM description: there is just one wave function.

But in practice I don't think there is any real reason we can't quantize gravity. I'm not an expert but loop quantum gravity seems like a reasonable approach and its very straightforward and its base: just find an acceptable description of geometry and then apply the ordinary quantum mechanical tricks we use to quantize it.

Also, you don't observe things in spacetime. Observations are always purely local. You just infer the existence of spacetime from local observations which are conveniently organized by putting them on a curved 4d Lorentzian signature manifold.
by podgietaru | 2025-08-27 09:55:05+00:00
There was a fascinating article I read a while back about Sylvia Plath, and the idea that she likely wouldn't have commited suicide a few years later due to the removal of that method.

It was mostly about the access of guns in the US, and the role that plays in suicidality. I cannot for the life of me find it, but I believe it was based on this paper: https://drexel.edu/~/media/Files/law/law%20review/V17-3/Goul...

Which was summarised by NPR here: https://www.npr.org/2008/07/08/92319314/in-suicide-preventio...

When it comes to suicide, it's a complicated topic. There was also the incident with 13 reasons why. Showing suicide in media also grants permission structures to those who are in that state, and actually increases the rate of suicide in the general population.

Where I lie on this is there is a modicum of responsibility that companies need to have. Making access harder to that information ABSOLUTELY saves lives, when it comes to asking how. And giving easy access to suicide prevention resources can also help.