MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by easterncalculus | 2025-08-05 13:02:06+00:00
> Young people are freaking out about the job market, the house market, and the dating market.

If we're going to discuss this problem honestly we need to admit the elephant in the room: it is much, much worse for young men than young women.

In jobs, from FT[0]:

"The unemployment rate for recent male graduates has risen steeply from less than 5 per cent to 7 per cent over the past 12 months. For young female graduates in the US, joblessness is unchanged over the same period, if not falling slightly."

"Most striking of all, recently graduated young men are now unemployed at the same rate as their non-graduate counterparts, completely erasing the college employability premium."

In dating, despite being much more selective, women match with around 40% of men they like, while for men it's more like 2%. Anecdotally I know many women in metropolitan areas can receive hundreds or thousands of likes in a week, while even a hundred is more than many (pretty average) men will receive in a lifetime. The number is zero, very often.

In housing it's more equal, but of course safety nets for young women exist through dating. Living in a HCOL metro area it's not uncommon for younger women to move in with their partners, and not have to pay much or any rent. That option is much, much rarer for young men, so if you don't have parents to save you, no one's coming.

[0]:https://archive.is/D2cBy
by lo_zamoyski | 2025-08-05 13:02:08+00:00
Academia is a petty place.

No "system" can ever overcome such problems. Sure, some political orders are better than others in various respects, but nothing will overcome the basic origin of our problems, which is us! The "system" itself is made from the crooked timber of our humanity, and even if some perfect "system" could be made, its perfection could only be actualized by a perfect people.

Hence the need to focus less on systems and more on personal virtue. You want to find your greatest enemy? Look within.

To quote Solzhenitsyn: "The line separating good and evil passes not through states, nor between classes, nor between political parties either – but right through every human heart.”
by gchamonlive | 2025-08-05 13:02:12+00:00
I don't think it's essentially human to be cutthroat and competitive, it's just capitalism. If we could come up with an economic system centered first on the care we could see it differently. Because what you see in small, specially poor communities is that trust in each other is strong.

You could argue that the church tried it and we had the inquisition, but I think it's different. We have way more benefit of hindsight and the population is way more educated than it was in the middle ages.

Not advocating for a renaissance of the Christian kingdom, but for embedding care and charity as first class moral values in economics.
by jacquesm | 2025-08-05 13:03:23+00:00
It is an opposition to reality.

I had really hoped that by now you'd have seen that the things that you voted for and hoped to see come to pass are not the universal sweet that you thought they would be. But all I see is that every time more news about the disastrous political direction that USA has taken is that you shift your goalposts with it and declare that this too is what you wanted. As a dad of bi-racial kids I would be super worried that those chickens would come home to roost. These are not just paper games and plenty of people who thought their situation in the USA was a safe as houses - and who voted for Trump - have seen that assumption invalidated.

But as they say: a conservative is a liberal with a daughter.
by jjgreen | 2025-08-05 13:06:06+00:00
Wittgenstein in a lecture once asked his audience to imagine coming across a man who is saying “...5, 1, 4, 1, 3 — finished!”, and, when asked what he has been doing, replies that he has just finished reciting the complete decimal expansion of π backwards.

A. W. Moore The Infinite, Routledge, 1990
by sgnelson | 2025-08-05 13:07:18+00:00
There's a lot of argument about whether or not the bomb should have been dropped, and that debate will go on forever.

And while the following is not as important as the decision to drop the bomb, I think the decisions to publish "Hiroshima" and how it was published (especially in 1946) is very much worth understanding. This was not a story the US Government did not want to get out.

The US military/government tried to hide many of the facts about what happened at Hiroshima/Nagasaki for various reasons (military secrecy was one, but I think hiding the true impacts of the horrors of the bomb from the American (and world) public was the big one.)

You can read about the coverup of the nuclear weapons impact on Hiroshima in the book "Fallout" by Lesley Blune: https://scribepublications.com.au/books-authors/books/fallou...

And here's a short article that I quickly googled that discusses the story behind the story using "Fallout" as a reference: https://insidestory.org.au/the-making-of-john-herseys-hirosh...
by const_cast | 2025-08-05 13:07:27+00:00
I mean, this is just wrong.

Autopilot on a plane does actually drive the plane. You can go as long as hours without any human input requirement. Pilots can eat, go to the bathroom, what have you.

Of course we have two pilots, just in case, but this isn't necessary - some countries are pushing for one pilot because the vast majority of flying is done by the plane.

That doesn't mean that autopilot systems on planes are more sophisticated. It just means that automating a plane is much, much easier than automating a car.

We also have fully autonomous trains.
by __MatrixMan__ | 2025-08-05 13:08:03+00:00
The simplest possible lightning bolt would be a straight line with a positive side and a negative side, no? If so, isn't that a single discharge?

Certainly what you're describing happens. You see the effect in the spark gaps of a Marx generator: one discharge triggers the next. I'm just saying that it's not necessarily the case that multiple differently charged branches mean spatially disconnected bolts. The path of least resistance is going to be through a nearby bolt of lightning, supposing one exists (plasma being a good conductor) so I'd expect they have a tendency to merge, so you get a network of sources and sinks. Probably as new nodes join the network what was once a source could become a sink--the channel being open for further equalization with new distant point.

Whether to count that as one thing or many, idk.
by jdhwosnhw | 2025-08-05 13:08:23+00:00
I thoroughly disagree with this sentiment.

In my experience, the most helpful approach to performing RCA on complicated systems involves several hours, if not days, of hypothesizing and modeling prior to test(s). The hypothesis guides the tests, and without a fully formed conjecture you’re practically guaranteed to fit your hypothesis to the data ex post facto. Not to mention that in complex systems there is usually 10 benign things wrong for every 1 real issue you might find - without a clear hypothesis, its easy to go chasing down rabbit holes with your testing.
by darrenf | 2025-08-05 13:08:31+00:00
Yeah, I didn’t go the “Creating a Safari web extension” route, rather I went via “Packaging a web extension for Safari”: https://developer.apple.com/documentation/safariservices/pac...

I note that they say the command has changed from the one I used, it’s now:

xcrun safari-web-extension-packager

My extension has storage/settings, and it works fine. I have edited no Swift code at all.
by jghn | 2025-08-05 13:08:42+00:00
I'll take this a step further. I don't understand why so many people are installing security cameras at all. And my observation has been that there's often an inverse correlation between how much someone needs such a camera and how likely they are to have one. It's always the suburbanites who are talking about their Ring cam footage and freaking out that someone's at the door, oh wait, it's just FedEx.

Despite what most people seem to think, crimes like break ins in the US are extremely rare. Why do people still feel the need to gear up their homes like Fort Knox?
by le-mark | 2025-08-05 13:08:51+00:00
TLDR: Curl has been around for 10,000 days and they’re collecting user stories.

Back in the 00s we had a misbehaving application distributed on about 20 servers that would go haywire from time to time. I built a server monitoring solution consisting of a cgi bin shell script that cat’d a bunch of /proc info together, then curled them from a central server and formatted into an html page that one could refresh every few seconds to monitor server health. Then I could go in and restart the node before the business users started screaming. They were too cheap to buy an existing solution to do this.

Don’t miss those days at all.
Show HN: VibeCheckAudit – Expert Code Audit for AI-Built and No-Code Apps
by vitjbr | 2025-08-05 13:08:57+00:00
Vibe coding isn’t going anywhere. So let’s make it not shit.

I like vibe coding. It saves me hours every day writing boring code.

I’m a big fan of shipping fast and getting real market feedback as soon as possible and building an MVP is all about cutting corners, BUT some corners shouldn’t be cut. I’ve seen vibe-coded apps leak data, rack up massive infra bills, or crash under the load of four (4) users.

Vibe coding is the future of development, but until LLM agents can reliably ship bulletproof code, you still need a human in the loop.

That’s why I launched VibeCheckAudit — a sanity check for your app, performed by a senior engineer.

You get a proper teardown of: - Security - Stability - Code quality - Infra choices - UX red flags - And anything else that breaks when real users touch your app

You’ll know exactly what to fix, or get a green light to launch with confidence.
by more_corn | 2025-08-05 13:09:18+00:00
The restaurant last night cooked my chicken in the microwave. It would have been far better for everyone if before placing the plate in the microwave they scraped it into the trash. Then it wouldn’t have ruined my otherwise mediocre salad. In the future where all food is cooked in the microwave I’m quitting. I’ll go construct a log cabin in the woods and cook my own food over a fire or go without.
by gtvwill | 2025-08-05 13:09:50+00:00
Adhering to robots.txt is merely a courtesy.

Much like a trolley drop off at your local shopping center car park. Some users will adhere to it and drop their trolleys in after their done. Others will not and will leave it wherever.

Your machine might access a page via a browser that is human readable. My machine might read it via software and present the content to me in some other form of my choosing. Neither is wrong. Just different.

Don't like it? Then don't post your website on the internet...
by jimnotgym | 2025-08-05 13:09:51+00:00
Great work. Everything you say in your Readme about existing systems is true.

I notice you don't have financials yet. In my opinion the API approach is really difficult to get right with financials. Every finance professional will tell you nightmares about 'the stock doesn't balance between the two systems'. The first reason on stock is a costing problem, you must have the same costs in both systems, so every purchase cost change, every bom roll up must change both. The second is on quantities. This is usually caused by a stock movement that somehow failed in the API to the financials. If it is done in a more tightly coupled way, you post the stock movement and the financial movement inside a database transaction and it either fails everywhere or posts everywhere. I worked on one system where it posted each half of the double entry in different transactions, so would fail and leave the ledger out of balance! Happy to chat further
by notthetup | 2025-08-05 13:10:06+00:00
> The Ingenic Zeratul, Atlas, and Tassadar platforms are a series of System-on-Chip (SoC) solutions designed primarily for battery-powered IoT cameras and smart home devices.

Seems like someone at Ingenic is a StarCraft fan!

https://github.com/themactep/thingino-firmware/wiki/Zeratul-...
by tiagod | 2025-08-05 13:10:36+00:00
What I'm arguing is that in the context of CCTV (Closed-circuit television) systems, NVR is a universal term.

I would also argue that the expansion of "e.g." is not "absolutely obvious". I know what it means ("for example"), but I had to google it to know it's an abbreviation of "exempli gratia", and I don't speak Latin, so I don't even know exactly what that means without reading further.

In the same way, you can also quickly understand from the page what an NVR is without knowing the exact expansion.
by ubermonkey | 2025-08-05 13:10:58+00:00
We don't really agree, though, because I don't think it sucks at ANYTHING.

It's pretty good at everything it does. Are there purpose built specialist tools that are better for many of the things it does? Sure! But the efficacy of a Swiss Army Knife shows that, most of the time, you don't need to bother chasing down the perfect screwdriver (e.g.) if there's just a loose screw to deal with.
by filoleg | 2025-08-05 13:11:42+00:00
> god forbid you have the word Android somewhere in your app

I literally have an app installed on my iPhone called “Android TV” (a remote to control android smart TVs, which I used to have years ago), and it says “Connect to Android TV” in giant header typeface on the app homescreen.

Searching for “Android” on app store brings up even more apps containing that word in the name and in the app, including third-party non-Google apps.
by davydm | 2025-08-05 13:12:17+00:00
all good and well if the ai agents actually solve the problem (not just delete your database or skip your tests) and do so at a lower overall cost (from the business perspective) - which also seems unlikely considering the studies showing:

1. opensource devs who ran on 246 (iirc) problems with ai assistance all projected that they would save around 20% of their estimated time, but all went over by about the same margin - salaries cost money, people are paid per _time unit_, not per deliverable (though if we were, I think there'd be a lot fewer ai-first devs out there - see sunken time cost above)

2. studies of opensource code monitoring error rates for ai-assisted repos showed a much higher defect rate than those "artisinal" coders you disdain so much - this is likely a corollary to (1) where in that case, devs have to debug ai-generated code that they could have written faster themselves

And the whole argument forgets about the upskill issue that will become more prevalent in the future: if we're replacing low-skill workers with ai agents, even assuming that those agents can do a better job (and when you actually _measure_ it, instead of just _thinking_ it, it turns out they don't), we end up with a massive skill gap as no-one upskills when they're replaced.

It's good for me - I'll probably still be able to get work when I'm 80 (anyone remember y2k?) - but it's bad for the industry as a whole, and definitely bad for any entry-level coders who were going to become great, but couldn't, because they couldn't learn on the job they didn't have.

As for competing in the labor market - we'll see how that goes as more and more companies are starting to realise that the "savings" promised to them by ai code agents not only don't materialise, but are often actually _losses_. Again, see (1) and (2) above. I don't have links, but they should be relatively easy to find - I found them all right here.

"ai" in it's current incarnation (glorified token predictors) will never surplant skilled devs, simply because it cannot understand anything. It can't understand the domain, it can't understand the users, it can't understand the code. It has no concept of understanding. All it knows is "sequence a,b,c likely is followed by d", just on a larger scale. If it can do a fully-functional, unbuggy bit of code for you, it's simply because it's seen that exact code before, and in that case, it's robbed you of learning anything because the journey to finding that code, or the docs that spawned it, is part of the learning process. Much like we always scolded devs who copy-pasta'd from Stack Overflow, we should hold these agents to the same standard.

Please, please, at least if you're going to use these tools, _don't trust them_. Scrutinise everything. Personally, having to double check a confidently wrong junior dev all day (one which won't learn from its mistakes either) sounds like a step down from actually creating stuff.
by troupo | 2025-08-05 13:12:18+00:00
> I think the syntax is much more complicated to read, requiring backtracking to understand.

Same as with `array_merge(...array_column($arr, 'values'));` or similar nested function calls.

> Imagine you're just scanning code you're unfamiliar with trying to identify the symbols. Make sense of inputs and outputs, and you come to something as follows.

We don't have to imagine :) People working in languages supporting pipes look at similar code all day long.

> but the self-documentating nature of a couple variables defining what things are or are doing seems important to writing maintainable code

Pipes do not prevent you from using a couple of variables.

In your example I need to keep track of $values variable, see where it's used, unwrap nested function calls etc.

Or I can just look at the sequential function calls.

What PHP should've done though is just pass the piped value as the first argument of any function. Then it would be much cleaner:

$result = $arr |> array_column('values') |> array_merge() |> array_reduce(fn($carry, $item) => $carry + $item, 0) |> fn($x) => str_repeat('x', $x);

I wouldn't be surprised if that's what will eventually happen
by lskfiep | 2025-08-05 13:12:28+00:00
This is MUCH more than a 'Build Your Own Lisp'. To the point of almost being anything but.

This is an amazing resource for getting started with learning C by making your own "programming language", independent of any Lisp conventions.

For me, the most 'lispy' aspect of 'making your own lisp' is prebaked by the author with their using their own prebuilt parser library 'mpc'. (I was unable to find a link to the source in the book, so https://github.com/orangeduck/mpc )

I was unable to find any instance of 'car' or 'cdr' or 'caddar' and their like, which I feel is the real 'build your own lisp' epiphany.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAR_and_CDR

The parser is so widely, and wildly, useful that it is independent of notation style, for instance, lisp's nearly ubiquitous 'polish notation'. (or its variants, for instance, 'cambridge polish notation')

Perfect example:

Under 'Chapter 9: Reading Expressions':

> Don't Lisps use Cons cells?

> Other Lisps have a slightly different definition of what an S-Expression is. In most other Lisps S-Expressions are defined inductively as either an atom such as a symbol of number, or two other S-Expressions joined, or cons, together.

> This naturally leads to an implementation using linked lists, a different data structure to the one we are using. I choose to represent S-Expressions as a variable sized array in this book for the purposes of simplicity, but it is important to be aware that the official definition, and typical implementation are both subtly different.

https://www.buildyourownlisp.com/chapter9_s_expressions#Read...

This is an awesome educational resource.

I think I would promote it more broadly than "Build Your Own Lisp".
by Yizahi | 2025-08-05 13:12:37+00:00
This is an example of a very limited social darwinism. Basically the idea is to remove a lot of enforcement and rules in some activity, or maybe even all, and then "free market" will regulate itself, with "deserving" students managing to manage themselves, and "undeserving" ones lets behind.

But the point of the university is not only teach English grammar and math operations, but also to work in teams, manage yourself, etc. The social stuff. And I suspect a significant number of students benefit from it. And I also suspect that by doing this at scale, the whole society benefits on average.

Removing all control and only checking the knowledge during the exam would lead to a lot of students never catching up. It is likely that it will also lead to the top students being more and more lax and eventually also falling behind.

The whole idea hinges on the base motivation - why do we need primary/secondary etc. education at all? To produce a dozen elite self motivated geniuses per year per country? Then your proposal would work perfectly. Or maybe motivation is different?..
by adornKey | 2025-08-05 13:13:51+00:00
In my experience (about 2 decades ago) in a group of 20-30 students only 2 or 3 are able and willing to do homework. Most students just find someone else and copy from them. The real learning happens when preparing for a big exam.

And to pass an exam students have to prepare for the exam. Homework will only help there if it is similar to the exam.

One time I had to evaluate a written exam where the professor had set up a trap. There was a question that looked like a standard question from homework, but if you used the standard-techniques from the course your calculations didn't work - it was a nasty special case. Most people that started with that question just burned 30 minutes without getting anywhere... a lot of students failed, but at least they learned something about life...

And Oral exams are different. Giving a quick well prepared answer and being able to solve difficult tasks over a few days are completely different skills. Students there prepare for the professor. There are transcripts of previous oral exams. And professors change over the years - the final tough question of an excellent student will a few years later become a starting question. People that didn't know that game and didn't have access to any transcripts were in serious trouble... None of the Homework would have helped in the oral exam.
by coderatlarge | 2025-08-05 13:14:16+00:00
the way i’ve generally understood the use of the word “vicious” in this context is in judging other academics’ work quality. which is also typically where i think most people from the outside perceive the stakes to be low: as in who cares whether one more journal article that no one will read gets published? but from the inside it can mean the difference between tenure and no tenure (for the young academic vying for it), respect and abject failure, money or no money.
by lapcat | 2025-08-05 13:14:52+00:00
> most developers have to buy ads directly because of the current flaws.

I wouldn't say it's because of the flaws. It's because of the design: regardless of how well search works, the top hit is always an ad. At best, even with search working perfectly, a search for your own app would return your app as the #2 hit at highest. The search ad system still incentivizes developers to buy ads for searches of their own app, if only as a defensive measure to prevent other developers from inserting their apps at the #1 spot. And Apple makes money, and you pay money, if App Store users click on your own ad for your own app at the #1 spot rather than the "free" search result at the #2 spot.

Oh yeah, and you can't block App Store search ads with an ad blocker. Consider how the App Store is entirely native and has no web-based purchases or downloads.
by wowczarek | 2025-08-05 13:15:28+00:00
This exactly. While on the visual side I prettified it a bit over time, Initially I was really tempted to do some major keybind remapping, having used lots of GUI terminals like Terminator in parallel, especially the infuriating h/v splits that I still routinely confuse after years with tmux, but I stopped myself so as not to cripple myself when I log in to anything that has tmux running defaults - and I'm happy with this choice.
by troupo | 2025-08-05 13:16:01+00:00
Why didn't you format the pipes, too?

$result = $arr |> fn($x) => array_column($x, 'tags') |> fn($x) => array_merge(...$x) |> array_unique(...) |> array_values(...)

vs

array_values( array_unique( array_merge( ...array_column($arr, 'tags') ) ) );

With pipes you have linear sequence of data transformations. With nested function calls you have to start with innermost function and proceed all the way top the outermost layer.