MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
Show HN: Sinkzone DNS – Forwarder that blocks everything except your allowlist
by dominis | 2025-08-06 16:08:23+00:00
Most site blockers work by blacklisting distractions. That never worked for me, the internet is too big, and there’s always something new to waste time on.

I wanted the opposite: allowlist‑only browsing. Block everything by default, and explicitly allow only what I need.

So I built Sinkzone: a local DNS forwarder with two modes:

Monitor mode: lets all traffic through, but logs every domain so you can decide what to allow.

Focus mode: only allowlisted domains resolve; everything else is blocked (NXDOMAIN).

It’s open source, written in Go, and runs locally on macOS, Linux, and Windows. Works a bit like Pi‑hole, but instead of blocking ads, it blocks everything unless you say otherwise.

I’m curious if this would be useful in your workflow. If you try it, please let me know what breaks, what works well, and what you’d improve.
by m-hodges | 2025-08-06 16:08:38+00:00
There was a lot of consternation about this in 2017: "Article V allows an alternative method of proposing constitutional amendments, which cuts Congress out entirely: two-thirds of the state legislatures can call for a constitutional convention. To be in a position to do this, the G.O.P. needs to gain control of just one more statehouse".¹ At the time, Republicans controlled 33/50 state legislatures.² Today they control 29/50.³

¹ https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/03/13/republicans-an...

² https://documents.ncsl.org/wwwncsl/Elections/Legis_Control_0...

³ https://documents.ncsl.org/wwwncsl/About-State-Legislatures/...
by triknomeister | 2025-08-06 16:08:39+00:00
Definition of freedom has changed in cloud era. The idea behind GPL was, if you modify your code and distribute it, you need to contribute back the changes, with the wider goal of increasing the commons. All the legalese was just to make sure that the idea worked.

In the era of cloud, distribution needs to include distribution over wire, because so many apps are now run in the cloud. And that's why AGPL. It preserves the spirit of GPL in modern times.
by zackmorris | 2025-08-06 16:09:06+00:00
This is the same problem in the US. Legislation (that protects the environment, minorities, the ability to compete in the market, etc) that took years, even decades to get signed into law, is getting repealed today by the current administration via executive order or simple majority vote. Because sabotage is much easier than building something.

Unfortunately the only answer that I know of is eternal vigilance, which is the price of liberty.

I decided to look up who that saying is attributed to, and apparently it's John Philpot Curran, not Thomas Jefferson. But I like Orwell's saying better, because it shows why all of you are just as ineffectual at steering government policy as I am:

https://www.socratic-method.com/quote-meanings-and-interpret...
by mac-attack | 2025-08-06 16:09:48+00:00
Licensing talk is confusing to someone not steeped in it. I talked to Claude about it 1-2 weeks ago when it was first announced and it was framed as a reinforcement of FOSS ideals.

I actually made the jump from tailscale -> netbird last month. Definitely more work and learning, but much more aligned w/ my perspective of self-hosting and open-source software. (Yes I thought about headscale but the YouTube reviews of netbird won me over).
by qalmakka | 2025-08-06 16:10:03+00:00
my biggest issue with agents in neovim or emacs is that I also use emacs and neovim to open or edit sensitive data (like ssh keys, etc) that I don't want to upload to a random LLM.

A quick solution I devised is to use bubblewrap to get a fully separate instance of nvim. Something along the lines of

alias lvim "bwrap --bind / / --bind $HOME/.config/{lazy,n}vim --bind $HOME/.local/share/{lazy,n}vim --proc /proc --dev /dev nvim"

works great (note: fish alias)
by mystraline | 2025-08-06 16:10:21+00:00
> Are you telling the management of this outfit never looked into this phenomena?

To counter, I think that HN is being used as a testcase to shove techbro and VC ideology across all of tech. And secondly, its some of the most potent tech market research. Its a textsearch goldmine.

I believe YC knew what they were doing, and intentionally chose this course of action.

I'm guessing you're not in the VC or founder club. I only found about that https://github.com/minimaxir/hacker-news-undocumented

> Additionally, founders of YC companies see each other's usernames show up in orange, which — although not an explicit benefit — does allow fellow YC founders to immediately identify one another in discussions.

Even with the significant bias here, I still read it. I also read lobsters as well, which is here minus techbro insanity.
by Insanity | 2025-08-06 16:10:22+00:00
I actually resonate with this as well, but similarly can't really explain why. I have my own set of dotfiles (one set for my 'home setup' and one set for my 'work setup').

They are versioned and stored on GitHub, and are actually relatively static at this point. And even though it's pretty standard stuff, I wouldn't feel comfortable sharing them publicly. Odd.
by rendx | 2025-08-06 16:10:36+00:00
Nina Peršak, Pathways to the criminalisation of emotional distress: An offence- and harm-based typology, International Journal of Law, Crime and Justice, Volume 63, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijlcj.2020.100416.

"The article examines the criminalisation of causing negative emotional states in others and pursues a principled response to the question under which conditions, in a liberal democratic society, it is legitimate to criminalise human conduct that leads to emotional distress in others. Its main aim is to develop an exploratory typology of different types of legally-relevant emotional distress, based on existing offences and informed by the criteria drawn from criminal law philosophy."

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/new-law-against-emotional-abu...

"From March 2019, psychological violence is finally equated with physical violence in Denmark through a new law. […] In 2010, the French government criminalized psychological violence in intimate relationships, with the punishable offense carrying a maximum sentence of three years in prison and a €45,000 fine (approximately US $51,345). In England and Wales, coercive control in intimate relationships became a criminal offense in 2015. Last year, Scotland also adopted a similar measure."

https://neurolaunch.com/is-psychological-abuse-a-crime/

"In some jurisdictions, psychological abuse is explicitly criminalized. France, for example, passed a law in 2010 making psychological violence in relationships a criminal offense. Similarly, some U.S. states have laws that specifically address emotional abuse, particularly in the context of domestic violence or child abuse.

But for every country or state that recognizes psychological abuse as a standalone crime, there are many more that don’t. In these places, psychological abuse often falls under broader categories of abuse or is addressed through civil rather than criminal law. […]

But here’s the rub: the burden of proof in criminal cases is high. “Beyond a reasonable doubt” is a tough standard to meet when dealing with something as intangible as psychological abuse. It’s like trying to catch smoke with your bare hands – possible, but incredibly challenging.

This is where psychological abuse lawsuits in civil court can sometimes provide an alternative path to justice. The burden of proof is lower, typically requiring only a “preponderance of evidence.” It’s not perfect, but for many victims, it’s a more accessible route to holding their abusers accountable."
by afzal_ali | 2025-08-06 16:11:17+00:00
Location: Lahore, Pakistan

Remote: Yes

Willing to relocate: Yes

Technologies: Ruby on Rails | React js | Typescript | PHP Laravel | MySQL | Psql | AWS | AI

Résumé/CV: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Q6IQrVH3llpEqX0CRt_YzN08_Jf...

Email: afzalali2728@gmail.com
by AnotherGoodName | 2025-08-06 16:11:25+00:00
I'm already seeing this with my AI subscription via Jetbrains (no i don't work for them in any way). I can choose from various flavors of GPT, Gemini and Claude in a drop down whenever i prompt.

There's definitely big business in becoming the cable provider while the AI companies themselves are the channels. There's also a lot of negotiating power working against the AI companies here. A direct purchase from Anthropic for Claude access has a much lower quota than using it via Jetbrains subscription in my experience.
by conn10mfan | 2025-08-06 16:11:39+00:00
we really need to mandate that software engineers and ML researchers have some rudimentary ethics and aesthetics education, words really cannot describe how much of an abomination AI generated music is, it should be an outrage to our collective intelligence and creativity that tools trained illegally on the work of unaware artists are attempting to disposes those artists of their livelihoods and cultural functions

while we spin our wheels trying to displace those of us who have decided to produce culture, our adversaries will invest in medicine, energy production, transportation, etc...

what profound contempt for humanity a culture must have to produce tools such as these
by hintklb | 2025-08-06 16:12:03+00:00
I think you make good points.

The main difference that struck me between the EU and living in the US is that by default EU citizens will assume good intent. I see European protests as interest groups that need to show that they are still important once in a while.

In the US, people will assume bad intent by default for politicians. This will lead to a ton more push back and scrutiny
by firefax | 2025-08-06 16:12:04+00:00
>I gave you a definition. You could start with that and highlight anything you disagree with.

You did not define parody, you simply stated that "Creating fake nudes of people is not 'parody'. Parody says something, that's what gives it the artistic value we weigh above the targets desire to control their image.", which did not address my initial point -- sometimes an artwork is merely saying "fuck you", or even nothing at all -- you fail to lay out how to operationalize your subjective views on what is or is not "art"

>If you're instead talking about legal definitions then nobody cares.... There's no overt protection of parody anywhere I can find in American law

Factually inaccurate -- there's literally an entire subsection about parody in the article on fair use in Wikipedia -- deepfakes are often created from copyrighted images.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use#Parody
by wqaatwt | 2025-08-06 16:12:06+00:00
Problem is that very few “normal” people are even aware of this. Very few people particularly interested about most policies on the EU level. So they pretty much have free reign to do anything with minimal repercussions.

For better or for worse the EU itself is about as much of a democracy as some of the European empires were back in the in early 1900s with their sham parliaments which had very little real power.
by chrisco255 | 2025-08-06 16:12:22+00:00
This is not that big, stop being so dramatic. The very first line removed is the authorization for maintaining a Navy, the United States's most significant military asset.

This is obviously a mistake. An embarrassing one, but not a conspiracy. None of this carries any legal weight whatsoever, this is a website! Our government predates the web by a couple hundred years!

Imagine if the laws of our country hung on the thread of a single line of PHP.
by ecshafer | 2025-08-06 16:12:34+00:00
This is a good thing. The traditional big defense contractors have largely become incompetent. We need software companies with actual expertise in software, machine learning, ai, computer vision, etc. to make these next generation technologies. Couple this with the willingness of SV to pay employees, we might see some actual engineering being done. Palantir, SpaceX, Anduril, etc. have already shown they are capable of creating new products below budget, and ahead of schedule, something that Boeing, Lockheed, and friends have been unable to do since the soviet union fell.
by aidenn0 | 2025-08-06 16:12:35+00:00
I think you missed the point of the article. Consider Application A, that depends on Library L1. Library L1 in turn depends on Library L2:

A -> L1 -> L2

They are saying that A should not need a lockfile because it should specify a single version of L1 in its dependencies (i.e. using an == version check in Python), which in turn should specify a single version of L2 (again with an == version check).

Obviously if everybody did this, then we wouldn't need lockfiles (which is what TFA says). The main downsides (which many comments here point out) are:

1. Transitive dependency conflicts would abound

2. Security updates are no longer in the hands of the app developers (in my above example, the developer of A1 is dependent on the developer of L1 whenever a security bug happens in L2).

3. When you update a direct dependency, your transitive dependencies may all change, making what you that was a small change into a big change.

(FWIW, I put these in order of importance to me; I find #3 to be a nothingburger, since I've hardly ever updated a direct dependency without it increasing the minimum dependency of at least one of its dependencies).
by hyperpape | 2025-08-06 16:13:05+00:00
I think Maven's approach is functionally lock-files with worse ergonomics. You can only use the dependency from the libraries you use, but you're waiting for those libraries to update.

As an escape hatch, you end up doing a lot of exclusions and overrides, basically creating a lockfile smeared over your pom.

P.S. Sadly, I think enough people have left Twitter that it's never going to be what it was again.
by saalweachter | 2025-08-06 16:13:37+00:00
Eh, I have a hard time looking at the diff and thinking it's anything but someone screwing up a page update.

Some of the dropped lines are interesting, but things like the "let's have a navy" don't make any sense to drop, and removing the lines preventing States from minting their own currency, enter into treaties, and raise armies are way more favorable to Blue States at the moment.

Also, if someone was going through the Constitution cutting out parts they don't like, they'd be starting with a few notable amendments, not this section.
by jasonlotito | 2025-08-06 16:13:42+00:00
> And I, as card holder, don't need any men-in-the-middle when I pay at brick-and-mortar shop: such shop has account in some other bank and has payment terminal from this bank, not from PayPal. Why does online shop need Stripe, PayPal or other men-in-the-middle?

Most likely the shop DOES have an intermediary like Stripe and PayPal, just not Stripe and PayPal. There are other POS providers out there. They might also be dealing directly with a bank and using a 3rd party for the equipment and integration. But all that is different from the web. POS/brick and mortar is different from online. It's generally more secure and less prone to fraud.

> Why should I use them and not my bank directly? Why does this business exist?

You can. You can literally go to a bank and ask about opening up a merchant account. However, the overhead is much higher. Basically, you'll be opening up your financial history and have a lot of rule sand regulations you'll have to follow. And you'll have to do the integration work if it's not already done. And don't expect Stripe/PayPal levels of easy integrations.

And, on top of all that, you have PCI compliance you have to manage, and that's no small thing. On top of that, customers will be looking for PayPal/Stripe/Apple Pay/etc. Why? Because they are customer friendly and more convenient.

But you can 100% go the route of getting your own merchant account, going through all the paperwork, putting aside sums of money, integrating, taking on all the risk yourself, by all means.

Or you can slap PayPal/Stripe up and be done.
by amluto | 2025-08-06 16:13:45+00:00
Suppose this works: TSMC buys 49% of Intel and Intel remains competitive. Does the US really win? The US’s major fab owner ends up with close to or actual majority foreign ownership, actual competition in the market would be reduced, and there would probably be even more pressure for Intel to move operations out of the US or to consolidate such that it licensed TSMC IP instead of developing its own.
by ryanmcbride | 2025-08-06 16:13:50+00:00
This is the sort of workplace philosophising that I hate the most. Employees aren't children. They don't need to have artificial bullshit put up in between them and what they need, the person approving just needs to actually pay attention.

If someone wants a new computer they should just have to say why. And if it's a good reason, give it to them. If not, don't. Managers have to manage. They have to do their jobs. I'm a manager and I do my job by listening to the people I manage. I don't put them through humiliation rituals to get new equipment.
by chrismorgan | 2025-08-06 16:14:12+00:00
I understood that.

It’s fairly normal to treat context menus as modals within their parent window. Not universal, but my feeling (which I don’t trust here) is that it has been generally preferred for quite some time. I think this has also become a stronger custom as popovers have become more common, and pure context menus have become less common. It then makes sense to formalise on that pattern. And then applying the modal-closing behaviour across all windows makes sense, even if it’s not the only reasonable option and you’d prefer not.
by Bender | 2025-08-06 16:14:37+00:00
Gaslighting is a form of lying. Lying is not illegal in most countries, with some exceptions. Lying under oath in court or lying to federal investigators in the USA is illegal. Lying as a form of deception for monetary gain can be illegal. So I think an in depth answer to your question is probably going to be a bit complicated and nuanced.

The same applies to Gaslighting itself, as a form of Psychological warfare. Psychological warfare is legal in most countries but there are exceptions depending on how it is being applied. For example, if people were being gaslit in a way that effectively incites violence that would be illegal in most countries. Whether or not the person or organization is prosecuted may depend on who is doing it.
by freetonik | 2025-08-06 16:14:47+00:00
In the world of Python-based end-user libraries the pinned (non-ranged) versions result in users being unable to use your library in an environment with other libraries. I’d love to lock my library to numpy 2.3.4, but if the developers of another library pin theirs to 2.3.5 then game over.

For server-side or other completely controlled environments the only good reason to have lock files is if they are actually hashed and thus allow to confirm security audits. Lock files without hashes do not guarantee security (depending on the package registry, of course, but at least in Python world (damn it) the maintainer can re-publish a package with an existing version but different content).
by spooky_deep | 2025-08-06 16:15:07+00:00
> The important point of this algorithm is that it’s fully deterministic.

The algorithm can be deterministic, but fetching the dependencies of a package is not.

It is usually an HTTP call to some endpoint that might flake out or change its mind.

Lock files were invented to make it either deterministic or fail.

Even with Maven, deterministic builds (such as with Bazel) lock the hashes down.

This article is mistaken.
by l3x4ur1n | 2025-08-06 16:15:32+00:00
Nice! I was also thinking about e-reader with LLM support to discuss topics of the book I'm reading with, explain words or phrases (I'm not a native English reader) and so on. But this seems too troublesome to install and does not have a mobile app - I want to read books on the go, not really in front of my computer. Do you think it's possible to make it phone friendly and easier to install?
by edent | 2025-08-06 16:15:34+00:00
> The problem: Traditional e-readers are passive.

Why is that a problem? Your statement is a bit like saying "traditional avocados are too delicious. We at YuckCo are aiming to change that!"

You can't just define something as a problem merely to help you sell a solution.

> When you encounter something unclear, you have to context-switch to search for it.

Literally every eReader I've used has a built in dictionary. I tap the word and it tells me what it means.

How is that context switching but "Hey, Siri, what does the word avocado mean?" isn't?
by atommclain | 2025-08-06 16:16:09+00:00
It's funny, I prefer to use Safari on iOS instead of native apps because I have more control over shaping my experience (through user scripts and custom css) and Apple's focus on user privacy which may be all lip service, but at least it's part of their talking points; something I don't see with Chrome.

I'm sure Safari sucks to support for web developers and is missing a lot of cool apis, but I'm willing to take those tradeoffs for the increased privacy I get as a result.

That being said, I do think Apple should allow third party browser engines.
by duffyjp | 2025-08-06 16:16:36+00:00
Everybody is talking about Chrome, but I tell ya what I have that disabled on my Android in favor of Firefox. Firefox on mobile with full-fat uBlock Origin is the closest thing to parity with desktop web access you can get.

I don't just block ads, I block elements on sites I don't care about with :has-text RegEx rules. You can't do that on Chrome even on desktop anymore.

I'm this close to swapping to the Android as my primary device-- it's iMessage that has me chained. It's just too dang nice to respond to chats from my Mac during work so I don't need to pick up my phone.

Everything else is better on the Android. Don't get me started about the iOS keyboard or Siri.
by horsawlarway | 2025-08-06 16:16:38+00:00
This is a great example of chesterton's fence.

The author of this piece doesn't understand why a top level project might want control of its dependencies dependencies.

That's the flaw in this whole article, if you can't articulate why it's important to be able to control those... don't write an article. You don't understand the problem space.

Semantic versioning isn't perfect, but it's more than a "hint", and it sure as hell beats having to manually patch (or fork) an entire dependency chain to fix a security problem.
by yabones | 2025-08-06 16:17:13+00:00
Automotive design really peaked between 1995 and 2010. Timeless "regular car" designs like the Panther body, the 4th gen VW's, the E46 BMW's, Astro vans, Ford Rangers, etc. I'm sure my late-millennial nostalgia is making me see the past with rose coloured glasses, but things really are dull today [1]. It was really the confluence of the right regulations, slowly increasing fuel prices making innovation necessary but not highly urgent, and value engineering still being primitive enough that nobody was quite ready to stomach stuff like CVTs.

Nowadays, manufacturers and dealers are taking advantage of emissions regulations to turn everything into a "light truck" or SUV, leading to the most bland and uninspired designs. A body used to be designed by one small team, now every panel has its own focus groups and the cohesive whole is completely lost. And of course, value engineering and simulation is so sophisticated that Nissan and Chrysler can make your engine blow up exactly 1,000 KM past the warranty interval.

[1] https://images-stag.jazelc.com/uploads/theautopian-m2en/whit...
by resource_waste | 2025-08-06 16:17:15+00:00
But I like the walled prison where I can't screw up and make choices for myself. I appreciate that Apple makes it so I can't accidentally give my coordinates and have some Monarch track me and murder me or leak my noods.

+4500 upvoots

(I always thought it was suspicious that the anti-apple headline had +30k upvoots on reddit, but the top comment was pro-apple with significantly less. Its almost like they paid an external marketing team/troll farm to do reputation management)