MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by Justsignedup | 2025-08-26 13:53:48+00:00
> Maybe it's time for a third large phone OS, whether it comes from China getting fed up with the US and Google's shenanigans (Huawei has HarmonyOS but it's not open) or some "GNU/Linux" touch version that has a serious ecosystem. Especially when more and more apps and services are "mobile-first" or "mobile-only" like banking.

This makes me laugh. Not at you, but at the cycle. This was the convo years ago when this was possible, but getting consumers to trust a 3rd party like PalmOS (which was actually pretty darn good compared to android) is practically not possible.
by subw00f | 2025-08-26 13:54:17+00:00
>The justice, Alexandre de Moraes, temporarily banned Elon Musk’s social media platform X last year after the billionaire refused to obey court orders to suspend certain accounts.

>On May 11, the president of the Chamber of Deputies requested that the directors of Google and Telegram in the country be investigated for their actions against the bill, describing these actions as forceful and abusive of the companies' hegemonic positions in the market, motivated by economic interests, and cited possible crimes against democratic institutions.

I'm not even a supporter of the current Brazilian administration, or even the political system for that matter, but these companies MUST obey court orders and MUST refrain from using their positions to attack governmental institutions or to prevent legislation that goes against their economic-political gains. They may be above US law, but they will have to lobby harder if they want to go over some of them here.
by fennecfoxy | 2025-08-26 13:54:45+00:00
I somewhat agree with the protected systems part though. For example, handling payments. Now iOS and Android could both have 0-days that allow fraudulent payments to be made for all I know but there's a certain degree of trust there with 2 large companies.

But then again we still use visa/mastercard duopoly that allows you to make payments so long as your have their card number.

And then again x2; nothing will ever change, we live in a corporate hellscape where men in suits & ties make all the decisions, get themselves wealthier and the general public are too apathetic to band together on anything because they'd rather foot shoot than have someone not from their tribe receive a single cookie crumb.
by jraph | 2025-08-26 13:54:48+00:00
With you in general, but in this specific case, the whole thing seems healthy:

- Many companies (including competitors) are sponsoring LE, so the funding should be quite robust

- These companies are probably winning from the web being more secure, so the incentives are aligned with you (contrary to say, a company that offers something free but want to sink you under ads)

- the vendor lock-in is very weak. The day LE goes awry, you can move to another CA pretty painlessly

There are CAs supporting ACME that provide paid services as well.
by bsimpson | 2025-08-26 13:55:02+00:00
Before they rebased onto UNIX, Mac files had two parts: a data fork and a resource fork. Data had the binary. Resource had strings, images, and other assets that the binary needed.

It was great for local portability: you could put the file wherever you wanted, and it would still be colocated with its stuff. It was bad for network portability, because a lot of transport layers didn't respect the forks.

So Apple migrated to bundles - magic folders that look like a single file in the Finder, but contain all the resources it might need.
by michaelt | 2025-08-26 13:55:02+00:00
My impression is a lot of modern data centres are total-power-constrained, but not really space-constrained.

At least, if you look at them on streetview a lot of them seem to be in the middle of nowhere, surrounded by miles of undeveloped scrubland. If Google's Henderson, NV data centre [1] needed more space they could simply buy out the adjacent car wrecking yard or pet crematorium, or reconsider the gigantic gatehouse and vast expanses of beige gravel.

Even in Belgium, with its higher population density [2] the car park is bigger than the data centre.

The layout makes me think they were told they could only have a certain amount of power, but essentially as much land as they needed. So they're concerned about power and thermals, but maybe not about power and thermal density so much.

[1] https://www.google.com/maps/place/Google+Data+Center+-+Hende... [2] https://www.google.com/maps/place/Google+Data+Center/@55.557...
by evilduck | 2025-08-26 13:55:29+00:00
For all but one of my personal use cases, Tailscale + Caddy have even automated away the setup steps and autorenewal of SSL with LetsEncrypt. Just toggle on the SSL features with `tailscale cert`, maybe point Caddy at the Tailscale socket file depending on your user setup, then point an upstream at the correct hostname and you're done.
by realitydrift | 2025-08-26 13:55:29+00:00
That’s a really interesting reference. Bernstein and Halliday were basically pointing out that language is never just propositional, it’s always smuggling social structure with it. That’s exactly why drift matters: when an LLM compresses or rewrites, it isn’t just shifting words, it’s rebalancing those embedded cues of power, context, and purpose. Humans keep the “extra baggage” because it carries meaning beyond the literal. Models optimize it away. That gap between statistical surface and lived function is what I’ve been calling semantic drift.
by BirAdam | 2025-08-26 13:55:30+00:00
1. Apple’s optimizations are one point in their favor. XNU is good, and Apple’s memory management is excellent.

2. X86 micro-ops vs ARM decode are not equivalent. X86’s variable length instructions make the whole process far more complicated than it is on something like ARM. This is a penalty due to legacy design.

3. The OP was talking about M1. AFAIK, M4 is now 10-wide, and most x86 is 6-wide (Ryzen 5 does some weird stuff). X86 was 4-wide at the time of M1’s introduction.

4. M1 has over 600 reorder buffer registers… it’s significantly larger than competitors.

5. Close relative to x86 competitors.
by zoeysmithe | 2025-08-26 13:55:34+00:00
Yep this. This is just "we have so much technical debt, our square pegs should fit into all round holes!"

Business culture devaluing security is the root of this and I hope people see the above example of everything that's wrong with how some technology companies operate, and "just throw money at the problem because security in an annoying cost center" is super bad leadership. I'm going to guess this guy also have an MFA exception on his account and a 7 character password because "it just works! It just makes sense, nerds!" I've worked with these kinds of execs all my career and they are absolutely the problem here.
by FuriouslyAdrift | 2025-08-26 13:56:06+00:00
Because of all my internal systems that use certs to connect (switches, routers, iot, etc) that have manual only interfaces (most are tftp), I have had to go back to just running my own CA infrastructure and only using public CAs for non-corporate or mixed audience sites/services.

It's really annoying because I have to carve outs for browsers and other software that refuse to connect to things with unverifiable certs and adding my CA to some software or devices is a either a pain or impossible.

It's created a hodge podge of systems and policies and made our security posture full of holes. Back when we just did a fully delegated digicert wildcard (big expense) on a 3 or 5 year expiration, it was easy to manage. Now, I've got execs in other depts asking about crazy long expirations because of the hassle.
by andy_ng | 2025-08-26 13:56:28+00:00
It's kinda useless to raise this point unless we can think of some action to do about it.

Should people avoid the sun? Probably not. Sunlight is proven to have a lot benefit in regulating mood and biological clock.

Should people wear sunscream. Maybe yes, maybe no. I'm not sure. I myself prefer sunlight touch my skin. So unless the UV rate is too high, I won't put on sunscreen.

What are the actions that normal everyday ppl can take in your opinion?
by stego-tech | 2025-08-26 13:56:37+00:00
In our defense, it’s because we’re expected to give everything a cert but often have no say on the security and cryptography capabilities of what’s brought onto the network in the first place, nevermind the manpower and time to build such an automated solution internally. Execs bringing in MFPs that don’t support TLS, PLCs that require SHA-1, routers with a packet buffer measured in single-digit integers but with a Java web GUI, all of these horrors and more are why it’s such a shitshow even today.

Just because someone’s homelab is fully cert’d through Caddy and LE that they slapped together over a weekend two years ago, doesn’t mean the process is trivial or easy for the masses. Believe me, I’ve been fighting this battle internally my entire career and I hate it. I hate the shitty state of PKI today, and how the sole focus seems to be public-facing web services instead of, y’know, the other 90% of a network’s devices and resources.

PKI isn’t a solved problem.
by nakamotonotes | 2025-08-26 13:56:37+00:00
I relate. I used to outsource my judgment to whatever seemed most convincing online, which meant I also picked up a lot of disempowering “truths.” What helped me:

Test in reality. Instead of debating which advice was right, I just tried things in small experiments. Reality gave better feedback than any forum.

Write before searching. I’d first note down what I already know or would try. Then compare outside input to that. It built trust in my own reasoning.

Now I treat all advice (AI included) as raw input, not truth. My “source” is a mix of experiments + cross-checking multiple perspectives. The key shift was asking: does this expand me, or shrink me? That filter alone cut out a lot of limiting beliefs.
by luma | 2025-08-26 13:56:44+00:00
Alternatively, those people are dealing with legacy systems that are pathologically resistant to cert automation (looking SQUARELY AT YOU vmware) and elect for the longest lasting certs they can get their hands on to minimize the disruption.

It’s generally best to assume experts in other fields are doing things for good reasons, and if you don’t understand the reason it might be something other than them being dumb.
Show HN: Diff Checker Website – Diffchecker.dev
by subhash_k | 2025-08-26 13:57:02+00:00
Hi All,

Created a diffchecker website which does some basic diff check by comparing two text with clean UI.

Below are the features -

1. Real-Time Diff Checks 2. Character-by-Character Comparison 3. Expandable context lines for very large diff 4. Shareable links with content gziped as query params 5. Save diff in browser.

Already hitting some good daily users around 1K, how to increase user experience ?
by devjab | 2025-08-26 13:57:09+00:00
I'm still using my MacBook Air M1 with 8gb of Ram as my personal workhorse. It runs docker desktop and VSC better than my T14 whatever windows machine with 32gb ram. But that is windows and it has a bunch of enterprise stuff running. I assume it would work better with Linux, or even windows without whatever our IT does to control it.

With Nvidia Now I can even play games on it, though I wouldn't recommend it for any serious gamers.
by ryandvm | 2025-08-26 13:57:28+00:00
Honestly, just let him go nuts with Executive Orders. Legislatively, they are the Fisher Price steering wheel controls of government - they don't change the law in any way.

He feels like he's doing something, his base is satiated with the conflict and hurtful intent, and they can just as easily be rolled back in 3 years.

As long as he's not focused on passing actual laws (like the BBB), this is the best possible outcome of this administration. It's a bunch of performative bullshit that doesn't actually change anything.
by megaloblasto | 2025-08-26 13:57:29+00:00
Sort of off topic but this reminds me of a Hunter S Thompson quote I read yesterday about the Nixon administration

"Meanwhile, the Vice president of the United States has been lashed out of office and disbarred in his home state of Maryland, the president himself is teetering on the bring of a Burglary/Conspiracy indictment that will mean certain impeachment, and the whole structure of our government has become a stagnant mockery of itself and everybody who ever had faith in it"
by thothless | 2025-08-26 13:57:30+00:00
The "upscaling" significantly changes the content of the picture, altering half of the faces, their expressions, whether eyes are closed, mouths open, etc, on top of making it actually HARDER to see details. The "upscaling" on android smartphone cameras has always been similarly trash. There is always some odd fractal-looking noise filter added. Who is actually asking for this stuff?
by speckx | 2025-08-26 13:57:39+00:00
We document the extent to which workers in AI-exposed occupations can successfully retrain for AI-intensive work. We assemble a new workforce development dataset spanning over 1.6 million job training participation spells from all US Workforce Investment and Opportunity Act programs from 2012–2023 linked with occupational measures of AI exposure. Using earnings records observed before and after training, we compare high AI exposure trainees to a matched sample of similar workers who only received job search assistance. We find that AI-exposed workers have high earnings returns from training that are only 25% lower than the returns for low AI exposure workers. However, training participants who target AI-intensive occupations face a penalty for doing so, with 29% lower returns than AI-exposed workers pursuing more general training. We estimate that between 25% to 40% of occupations are “AI retrainable” as measured by its workers receiving higher pay for moving to more AI-intensive occupations—a large magnitude given the relatively low-income sample of displaced workers. Positive earnings returns in all groups are driven by the most recent years when labor markets were tightest, suggesting training programs may have stronger signal value when firms reach deeper into the skill market.
by HankStallone | 2025-08-26 13:58:00+00:00
Interesting, I've never thought of the spark arrestor as a safety feature. I guess theoretically it prevents starting a fire in dry conditions, which is a good thing.

My chainsaws came with two safety features: the kick guard (or handguard) and a tip protector. For those who don't know, the kick guard sits above your forward hand and stops the chain immediately if you push it forward. If the tip of your chain catches a log juuust right, and you aren't holding the saw firmly with both hands, it can "kick" the chain up towards your face. If that happens, the kick guard will hit your hand and stop the chain. You take a deep breath, pull the kick guard back to release the chain, and keep working. I don't know why anyone would remove it, or if it's even possible for my saws to run without it.

The tip protector is intended to prevent kickback at all, by keeping the tip of the bar from contacting anything in the first place. That's fine if you're cutting stuff a few inches across, but it makes cutting large stuff impossible and even small stuff inconvenient. Kickback doesn't happen often, very rarely if you're careful, and the kick guard handles it, so I've never seen anyone cut with a tip protector. But if you're new to using a chainsaw, it's probably not a bad idea to keep it on.
by terminalshort | 2025-08-26 13:58:00+00:00
Of course they do, and of course they would. Banks are in a crazy legal position where they are financially liable for user stupidity. If my bank account gets breached, it doesn't matter that I didn't take any reasonable security measures, the bank will still have to refund me. If the bank could say "you didn't follow our recommended security practices to use a PW manager and MFA or passkeys, so it's a FAFO situation for you," then they wouldn't be pushing for this stuff. But they can't do that because the government doesn't allow them to.

There is even government regulator pressure now for financial services to be liable for cases where the user legitimately authorizes a transaction to a party that turns out to be a scammer. Of course the banks want to watch your every move and control your devices. They would be stupid not to given the incentives.
by DiabloD3 | 2025-08-26 13:58:03+00:00
> You can't blindly sue anyone who uses LLMs. Correct, that has been established as a strawman that is frequently used on HN.

>In an even greater misunderstanding of the American legal system, you're using the Sony case to argue that you would win court cases against LLM users.

Not at all. I said this is the only actual path for the companies to survive, if they can thread that legal needle. The users do not get the benefit of this. The FBI spent the better part of 3 decades busting small time pirates reproducing VHS tapes using perfectly legal (as per the case I quoted) tape decks.

Notice, not everybody has won this challenge, the Sony case merely shows you how high you have to jump. Many companies have been found liable for producing a tool or service whose primary use is to commit crimes or other illegal acts.

Companies that literally bent over backwards to comply with the law still got absolutely screwed, see what happened to Megaupload, and all they did was provide an encrypted offsite file storage system, and complied with all applicable laws promptly and without challenge.

Absolutely nothing stops the AI companies from being railroaded like that. However, I believe that they will attempt a Sony-like ruling to save their bacon, but throw their users under the bus.

>the established precedent is in fact the opposite of what you want to do,

Nope, just want to sue the code pirates. Everyone else can go enjoy their original AI slop as long as it comes from a 100% legally trained model and everybody keeps their hands clean.

>and are now trying to back up and reduce that claim

No, I literally just gave the Sony case as an example of reducing the claim into the other direction. The companies may in fact find a way to weasel out of this, but the users never will.

Another counter-example, btw, not that you asked for one, is Napster. Napster was ordered by a court to shut down their service as it's primary use was to facilitate piracy. While it is most likely OpenAI et al. will try to Sony their way out, they could end up like Napster instead, or worse, end up like Megaupload.

>everyone is guilty of infringement until proven innocent.

Although you are saying this in plain language, this is largely how copyright cases work in the US, even though, in theory, it should be innocent until proven guilty. However, that exact phrase is only meaningful in criminal cases. It is much more loose in civil cases, and the bar for winning a civil case is much lower.

Usually in a copyright case, the copyright owner is usually the plantiff (although not always!), and copyright owner plantiffs usually win these cases, even in cases where they really shouldn't have.

>Continuing this discussion feels pointless.

Yes it really does. Many people on HN clearly think it is okay to copyright-wash through LLMs, and that the output of LLMs are magically free of infringement by some unexplained handwaving.

You still have not explained how a user can have an LLM reproduce a copyrighted work, and then distribute it, and somehow the copyright owners cannot sue everyone involved, which is standard practice in such cases.
by wat10000 | 2025-08-26 13:58:45+00:00
As a prospective buyer, I'm not much swayed by a promise of returns. I never know how easy it's going to be. It might be promised that it's quick and easy, then turn out to be a giant pain. There might be terms hidden in the fine print that I missed. I might have to (the horror) talk to a human, which is not what I want when buying software.

I've been buying this sort of software since it was called "shareware" and was obtained on floppies or downloaded over XMODEM from a local BBS. I made a living from it for a long time. The fact that almost nobody has done it this way should indicate it's not as good as it sounds. (The App Store may work this way in practice, but the stated terms are that you request a refund and then it might be granted, at the discretion of Apple. They also explicitly state that requests might be refused for "abuse" which is not defined, and could very well include merely getting too many refunds. It can't really be treated as a trial.)
by sgarland | 2025-08-26 13:58:49+00:00
As a semi-toxic semi-expert, I think one of the main reasons there is precious little blog-sized content that goes deep is that it’s hard to do. Most subjects, in or out of tech, can go incredibly deep on many, many points.

The more detail that’s included, the harder it becomes to write less. If you ask me to write 500 words on indexing strategies for an RDBMS, I’ll probably manage, but very little will be explained. If you ask me to write 5000 words, there’s no way I’ll hit that target, because I’ll want to explain every tangent, every fundamental, and so on.

The single best blog [series] that manages to pull this off, IMO, is Jeremy Cole’s series on InnoDB [0]. It’s not short taken as a whole, but each article is short enough that it (probably) meets people’s attention spans. I think the thing that makes it so great to me is that it’s written assuming that the reader already understands certain concepts. For example, he doesn’t spend multiple paragraphs explaining what a B+tree is; he links to the Wikipedia page, and then describes how InnoDB uses them.

In contrast, when I write something, I usually find myself assuming that the reader doesn’t have some fundamental knowledge. I usually try to either put it in a section that’s easily skipped, or in a pop-out toggle, but either way, it’s there.

To me, these fundamentals are incredibly important, because a. they’re how I understand things b. I don’t feel that you can operate something to its fullest capability (let alone fix it) if you don’t know how the thing works.

Re: gatekeeping, to me the perfect example is the Linux kernel. Torvalds is notoriously unfriendly, and while you can judge that however you’d like, the man has a massive weight on his shoulders, and letting code in that doesn’t meet his standards threatens that weight. I get it. Then, I also came of age during the RTFM era, so I’m used to it.

[0]: https://blog.jcole.us/innodb/
by schrodinger | 2025-08-26 13:58:55+00:00
I had the exact same realization after I posted if you see below (or click this https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44998664).

However, I wonder why it hasn't been done by text-based platforms like Reddit and Hacker News?

Reddit has the drop down with "New" items (for the "curators" to watch) and "Best" (presumably for once the items have been elevated to the front page). HN has the the same: the "New" link versus the home page.

Twitter is slightly different, and maybe more of what I'm thinking of, but the content is very different: short form, and original content rather than links to finds with an accompanying discussion. Similar, but not the same.

I wonder if that tells me that it just only works with "doomscroll" content — the kind of content where it's plentiful, short, and very little commitment to read each piece (and therefore very little time lost for a "poor" suggestion)? Or if there's something fundamentally different I'm missing?
by esafak | 2025-08-26 13:58:57+00:00
This is good advice for workers trying to thrive in dysfunctional organizations, but these are the kinds of people who cause the company to become dysfunctional in the first place, by only doing work that causes them to get ahead, instead of what is right for the company. And I'm not referring just to line workers here, but management too. Incentives are there to point people in the right general direction, not to give license to abandon your ethics and sense of craftsmanship. An alternative to pursuing incentives to the point of abandoning your principles might be to go to a better company, or even starting your own.