MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by fzeroracer | 2025-08-06 20:27:18+00:00
> Im fine with cops being sued for abuse, I dont think they should be personally liable for doing their job as trained.

Doctors have malpractice insurance specifically for cases like this. I see zero reason why police should not be forced to have that as well, which comes out of their retirement funds for when they fuck up. Do you believe doctors should have qualified immunity for just doing their job?

> US Qualified immunity doesnt protect police against tort claims assault, battery, negligence, or wrongful death

Yes it does. You would have to be utterly willfully ignorant of the history of qualified immunity and how it's been used in the US to say otherwise. Qualified immunity has been used to set the bar incredibly high for being able to sue the police and it's only in extremely exceptional circumstances that you will ever jump over that bar. I fully reject your claim and require you to substantiate it.
by com2kid | 2025-08-06 20:27:29+00:00
Math is simple.

Build more houses per year than people who want to move to the city. Prices will decrease.

NYC did this over 100 years ago, it became one of the world's most important cities.

SF did the same thing, it became a tier 1 world city.

Same for Chicago.

Then they stopped doing it.

Then no other city in America even bothered trying.

Also housing prices don't go down immediately with new construction, there is a latency. More so, sometimes prices just stabilize, but if prices stay the same for 5 years, and inflation and wages go up, that means the effective price of housing went down. If you keep building and prices stay the same for a decade, all of a sudden houses are affordable.

SF
by chugchug | 2025-08-06 20:27:40+00:00
I am going all in. There hasn't been a day where I haven't worked for 12-14 hours. But, this is a complex product and despite everything we are doing we may not make it. In SaaS, it's usually winner takes all and others scramble for pennies.

We are also trying fundraising to extend runway. Fundraising has changed so much now that people expect 1M in 6 months(?). I understand revenue expectation and not just building. But, applying viral product expectation to every product is not correct. But, it's their money and their expectation.

I have not given up yet. Which is why I mentioned one final push. And we are not burning investor money. They know and they are fully onboard to continue. We might wind up early and return the money. Nowhere I said we want to burn the money.

But, as a family man in 40s, I have to plan for the future. I can't just wait and see if things don't go write and then hop onto job market. Winding down is also a big work from employees, tax, compliance standpoint.
by red-iron-pine | 2025-08-06 20:27:54+00:00
> Taiwan needs this. Get everyone a bomb shelter.

Ample footage from Ukraine has shown that drones are very effective at getting into shelters, foxholes, and other enclosed spaces. Doesn't even have to be all that powerful of a boom, just enough to rattle everyone's cages enough to take them out of the fight for a little -- the next wave of drones will finish the job.
by daedrdev | 2025-08-06 20:27:56+00:00
Austin LITERALLY has falling housing prices from building more units

https://www.texastribune.org/2025/01/22/austin-texas-rents-f...

> A massive apartment building boom in the Austin-Round Rock region has driven rents downward, real estate experts and housing advocates have said.

Why do you even think this?

The evidence is screaming that we are clearly in a massive housing shortage.
by yojo | 2025-08-06 20:28:04+00:00
I’m one of those mom and pop owners. The decent ROI on renting out my starter home financed me adding an ADU to the lot, which I also rent out.

I’ve owned the house long enough that I’ve had several tenants churn out when they buy their own houses.

This doesn’t feel like a policy failure, IMO. Renters have the option to live in a free standing home while they save for a down payment, and “investors” have an incentive to increase density/add to the housing stock.

Not everyone is at a point in their life where it makes sense to own a home. It feels weird making a judgement that these people should be required to live in apartments.
by rzazueta | 2025-08-06 20:28:18+00:00
It was recently stated that 40% of owner-occupied homes are mortgage free: (https://www.fastcompany.com/91376388/housing-market-the-real...)

Various stats put the ratio of owner-occupied residences to renter-occupied residences at roughly 70% to 30% (https://www.apartmentlist.com/research/rent-statistics)

Since only 40% of those "owner"-occupied homes have their mortgages paid off, that means the bank owns the other 60%.

Doing the math, this means only about 28% of people actually own the place in which they live. The other 72% is owned by banks, investors, landlords, etc.

That fully 20% of homes in California - intended to be owned by families or individuals as their primary residence - are instead served out as rentals, and this is a low percentage compared to other states, is a massive indicator of the one the key issues facing Americans:

We don't own anything. Not even our own homes. Not even our lives, which we sell to others at a discount as "labor".

When we don't own anything, we have no stability. When we have no stability, we live in a constant state of uncertainty, which is just another word for "fear". Fear makes us act desperately or angrily or selfishly.

And the people who run everything use that fear to manipulate us into agreeing to be exploited by them - to work for them, vote for them, worship with/for/on them, etc.

If you actually want peace and freedom and liberty and all those things Americans claim to care about, we need to start by building stability in our lives.

That starts by taking back ownership of those things that belong to us through our efforts. The mortgage companies provide zero value to homeowners - they simply gate who gets to live in a home vs. who must pay for a rental, which is even more unstable.

Replace hierarchies with cooperatives. Stop using money as the exclusive determining factor of whether someone is housed, fed, clothed, or cared for.

Desperate people make lousy workers - ask any power and money pervert who believes in this system how hard it is to find good indentured servants who will just obey without complaining.

Stable, cared for people make excellent workers - fear may be a motivator, but gratitude is an even greater motivator. When people are stable and able to relax, they are more often willing to contribute toward keeping that stability. You see this when people who have "free" time spend it volunteering for their community.

If that stability comes at the expense of others, however, it's inherently unethical and leads us back exactly to the situation where we are now - where some people gain stability by manipulating others into working for them and stealing from them a significant portion of the value they create.
by observationist | 2025-08-06 20:28:22+00:00
The market has failed. It's allowed massive monopolistic and anti-competitive scenarios to play out, and technology outran legislation like crazy. There are billions of people who are a victim of the failure mode I pointed out. You using an alternative (and being here, on this forum) singles you out as one of one in tens of millions of people with the capacity and knowledge to accomplish that.

25 years ago it made sense to let things play out. Now we're looking at ownership by subscription, and people unable to actually own their own devices, with constant, ubiquitous, global surveillance for all but the most wealthy, and even them most of the time. We see a proliferation of some of the worst possible things online, and companies that are unable and unwilling to effectively moderate their billions of users with resorting to heavy handed authoritarian tactics. Tactics which, when recognized by those in power, are quickly taken over and utilized for purposes far beyond anything so prosaic as "protecting children" or "combating terrorism."

Apple and Microsoft and Google and the rest have shown us that the tech market is more or less just like the old steel and oil markets - robber barons rush in, coordinate, distill the market to a handful of effective players, capture regulation and lobby legislation to maximize their own profit, and there is no concomitant return of value to the users or the market in general.

If you're too big to run the business responsibly, you should be legally prohibited from expanding further. This is about as pro-market as you can get, it requires actual unmet needs in any market to be met, and holds those operating in the market to account for their behavior.
by k9294 | 2025-08-06 20:29:11+00:00
I spent almost 6 years trading crypto. Our best month's volume was $6B.

1. Nothing we tried with usual strategies worked consistently. Backtesting parameters, ML with smart feature selection, boosting, neural networks - everything failed out of sample. Maybe we were dumb, I don't know.

2. What worked was having a clear edge: - Private exchange programs with rebates for high-volume teams - Pure latency arbitrage - Weird arbitrage trading obscure instruments (e.g. on chain AMMs vs crypto exchange futures).

Both market maker and arbitrage strategies were very sensitive to latency. We built a low-latency trading engine in Java (on top of https://github.com/OpenHFT/Chronicle-Queue). We got 130mqs from market event to order send in a hot loop on 99.99 percentile. It was fun to optimize and benchmark.

- Tail latency matters. You can have 100ms at the 90th percentile and 10-50ms at the 99.9th percentile. For low latency strategies, this is pure loss. - Tail latency matters even more when markets go crazy. Event rates can jump from 10 per second to 1-2k per second. If your trading engine uses trades or bid/ask events, be ready. For OHLC bars it doesn't matter, but nothing based on OHLC worked for us.

---

p.s.

I wouldn't recommend trading to anyone. It's very stressful and exhausting. More importantly, all your hard work disappears like trying to hold sand in your hands. There's very little compounding of your work. Strategies constantly churn. You're always negotiating with managers for fees and API limits. You're always negotiating with managers for fees and API limits. They force you to buy and hold exchange tokens like Binance's BNB just to get slightly better fees, VIP status, or direct API access that bypasses firewalls.

The industry is extremely secretive - it's a zero-sum game with no incentive to share anything. When you meet someone who trades, it's usually hard to have a meaningful conversation. At least that was true for me. All our strategies were small-scale and we couldn't invest all our capital in them. So discussing what we did was basically saying "yes, we print money, here's how you can take it from us".

Overall, I was super lucky. We built a money-printing machine that worked for a few years. But in the end, my co-founder and I decided not to pursue it long-term. One day when yet another strategy stopped working, we just shut down all operations.
by com2kid | 2025-08-06 20:29:21+00:00
I just made a post saying the same thing so I feel the need to play devil's advocate - Induced demand also exists. Seattle got hit by this last decade when the Bay Area had no more construction but we still had some, people flooded here for affordable houses. Denver also got a lot of this, and so did Austin more recently.

Math has to take into account that if 30k people want to move to a city, and you build 40k houses ( to drop prices), well now maybe 50k people want to move to the city and prices will still go up!
by koolba | 2025-08-06 20:29:46+00:00
> "We don't have to build enough homes for people if we just force the poorest people to leave the state"

That’s literally what every other state with property taxes assessed on the current value of the home are doing. It’s why retirees move out of their larger homes when they no longer have children occupying the other bed rooms. It’s why you have actual turnover of housing to (generally younger) people that not only want to live there, but are gainfully employed and can afford to do so.

It’s not some evil scheme to evict granny. It’s efficient allocation of a finite resource.
by closewith | 2025-08-06 20:30:07+00:00
Well, two things.

First, I'm challenging the statement:

> Drug-addicted and mentally ill people do not know how to keep even a moderately organized living space.

Which is nonsense and a damaging stereotype. Drug addicts and mentally ill people exist in all areas of life and many are successful - more so than you or I.

Secondly, I'm challenging you on:

> The theory is the crazy people on the street will suddenly be not-crazy when they get an apartment

Because in fact there is now a great body of evidence that shows that housing-first, that is providing housing with no pre-conditions, is in fact extremely effectively at treating both uncontrolled addiction and untreated mental illness.
by gnabgib | 2025-08-06 20:30:09+00:00
Discussions:

Hotel (882 points, 19 days ago, 511 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44612487

Hertz (57 points, 1 month ago, 83 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44355923

Hertz dupe (50 points, 25 days ago, 69 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44546707
by Gracana | 2025-08-06 20:30:18+00:00
The context cache (or KV cache) is where intermediate results are stored. One for each output token. Its size depends on the model architecture and dimensions.

KV cache size = 2 * batch_size * context_len * num_key_value_heads * head_dim * num_layers * element_size. The "2" is for the two parts, key and value. Element size is the precision in bytes. This model uses grouped query attention, which reduces num_key_value_heads compared to a multi head attention (MHA) model.

With batch size 1 (for low-latency single-user inference), 32k context (recommended in the model card), fp16 precision:

2 * 1 * 32768 * 8 * 128 * 36 * 2 = 4.5GiB.

I think, anyway. It's hard to keep up with this stuff. :)
by ddejohn | 2025-08-06 20:30:26+00:00
Excellent post that actually gets into important details for real-world applications. I'm a huge fan of the design of Litestar.

> I also still think there are a lot of bad use cases for repositories and service layers that people should avoid, but that’s a digression which should probably become its own post

As a huge proponent of the repository pattern, I'll be looking forward to this post.
by comfysocks | 2025-08-06 20:30:35+00:00
California houses are not popular with professional “landlord” investors because the cap rates (net operating income / house value) are poor. Rents are limited to what potential renters are actually able to pay, while the prices are very high.

On the other hand, during the upswing in prices, house flipping in California was really popular with investors because the (then) low interest and likely capital gain made things easy.
by timeflex | 2025-08-06 20:30:55+00:00
A majority of banks & investors own real estate. You think people have the funds to pay cash at market rate? I've got an even better idea though to deal with people like this. About time we give renters the same rights as labor unions. If you think it is an inconvenience now, wait until it becomes legal for renters to go on strike & landlords are forced to negotiate in good faith.
by zdc1 | 2025-08-06 20:31:14+00:00
The market has solutions to this, but they are mostly for businesses. E.g. You can purchase "support" either from Microsoft, or other third parties that will then deal with MS for you if they can't fix it themselves. And whatever software you buy also has it's own support terms too. (I've had good experiences with paid AWS support under both models.)

On the flip side: if you're an individual, you're at a poker table with a $50 chip—you don't have leverage—you either just take the bet or don't. So you're basically forced to research the laptop/hardware/software you intend to run to verify it's a happy path, or it at least has vendors (or a local PC store) that will help you if something breaks, and hope for the best.

So I guess the question is, would people be willing to pay for good support? Would people even pay for an OS anymore?
by Fade_Dance | 2025-08-06 20:31:22+00:00
Yes, I agree with that as well.

Real humans have a spectrum of assuredness that naturally comes across in the conversation. With an LLM it's too easy to get drawn deep into the weeds. For example, I may propose that I use a generalized framework to approach a certain problem. In a real conversation, this may just be part of the creative process, and with time the thoughts may shift back to the actual hard data (and perhaps iterate on the framework), but with an LLM, too often it will blindly build onto the framework without ever questioning it. Of course it's possible to spur this action by prompting it, but the natural progression of ideas can be lost in these conversations, and sometimes I come out 15 minutes later feeling like maybe I just took half a step backwards despite talking about what seemed at the time like great ideas.
by tantalor | 2025-08-06 20:31:50+00:00
The old way of using driver's license (or any ID) to verify age is the antipattern.

We shouldn't replicate that in technological solutions.

ID is for "who you are", which doesn't matter for the types of things we use for age checks (bars, etc.)

There should be a way to verify your age without showing ID.

Sure, ID can do that. It is sufficient, but it should not be necessary.
by pc86 | 2025-08-06 20:33:28+00:00
Imagine being so braindead that instead of listening to users, you arbitrary select down to people who attend a conference, happen to see you, happen to realize you work for Microsoft, happen to care, happen to remember whatever obscure feature they or some coworker needed, and happen to explain it to you in a such a memorable way that you don't forget it, and on top of all that imagine you're so stupid that you think this is a Good Way to Do Things and you manage to rise up the ranks at Microsoft sufficiently high enough that you can influence product direction, or that you ear of those who can.

It's honestly pretty awe inspiring.
by fazkan | 2025-08-06 20:33:44+00:00
just released https://changeloghub.com,

it automatically creates changelog pages from github PR commits. Still trying to nail down the PR diff to changelog generation, mostly context issues. Rn, I basically summarize each diff and then give that as a context for AI to generate structured changelogs. Works well for smaller diffs, larger diffs loose context.

its free, feedback would be appreciated

video showing how it works

https://youtu.be/bntgkZGncZ4
by FirmwareBurner | 2025-08-06 20:33:56+00:00
You're moving away form the core issue again.

Do you think these online ID rules will:

1. actually keep kids safe from bad stuff? kids in the UK already bypassed it, and Instagram and TikTok are already bad for kids and not getting blocked so who's it really protecting?

2. or will it mainly be used by the government to easily doxx and crack down on those who speak against it while kids still can access porn?
by LeifCarrotson | 2025-08-06 20:34:29+00:00
Not a bad setup for an old single person either, or a married couple: it's much better than living under a bridge! Gets a little crowded as families grow, but people have made do in one-room houses (even with multigenerational families) for eons.

Of course, the dorm room setup is less vulnerable to exploitation if the dorm is rented or purchased separately from one's employer, otherwise you not only risk losing wages (and, in the US, access to health insurance) but also your home if you're laid off.

GP comment was obviously referring to Anatole France, who wrote sarcastically in 1894:

> Cela consiste pour les pauvres à soutenir et à conserver les riches dans leur puissance et leur oisiveté. Ils y doivent travailler devant la majestueuse égalité des lois, qui interdit au riche comme au pauvre de coucher sous les ponts, de mendier dans les rues et de voler du pain.

> It is the duty of the poor to support and sustain the rich in their power and idleness. In doing so, they have to work before the laws' majestic equality, which forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal loaves of bread.
by TimorousBestie | 2025-08-06 20:34:49+00:00
Of course it’s legal to interview tenants in the States, a landlord should simply avoid violating the Fair Housing Act in a particularly flagrant manner while doing so. (E.g., they should avoid documenting in writing that they’re refusing to rent on the basis of familial status! This parenthesis possibly based on a true story.)

Give it another couple years and I’m sure the courts will dismantle the FHA. Then landlords will have to find something else to complain about.
by ramoz | 2025-08-06 20:34:50+00:00
It's how these models/their-harnesses (e.g. the Claude Code js program) are being trained together in the RL stages.

I think the software is now a very important part of the training process. Which is why I think frontier labs are only capable of shipping "actual" agents.

Anthropic has figured something out here that others have not.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44816424
by zie | 2025-08-06 20:35:10+00:00
There are a few reasons:

* Multi-ownership can be easier. I.e. you can "hide" who owns the house and it disconnects ownership from property records.

* People think it adds liability protections.

* It might make transferring the house at death easier to control(i.e. LLC rules apply, not state real estate rules)

In the case of owning the house you live in under an LLC, the chances of it protecting you from most liability is 0%. The only thing I can think og it maybe protecting you from is debt obligations, if the person trying to collect from you didn't bother to find out why you don't own your house on property records. This probably has a very low chance of working anymore, but low is > 0 I guess.

In order to have LLC liability protections you have to separate the LLC from your personal life, i.e. you have to treat the LLC as a real business, no mixing bank accounts, etc
by doright | 2025-08-06 20:36:40+00:00
And the causality is the opposite in my experience. I view my smartphone as a maladaptive way of self-soothing. Locking away my phone just means I'm left with unchecked anxiety I can't think myself out of, and I've only deprived myself of one more method of addressing it (nonoptimally).

People without constant stress have less temptation. In times where my anxiety is the lowest due to sheer circumstance, any reason I have to doomscroll vanishes and I can then occupy my time with a hobby. But it's not because I chose to do away with my phone that I'm able to do so, it's because I didn't have to spend all my time and effort fighting stress. The less stress, the closer the "choice" gets to being a no-brainer, entirely automatic.
by pcaharrier | 2025-08-06 20:36:44+00:00
>In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, landlords converted thousands of houses, hotels, apartment buildings, and commercial buildings into SROs, and by 1950, SRO units made up about 10% of all rental units in some major cities. But beginning in the mid-1950s, as some politicians and vocal members of the public turned against SROs and the people who lived in them, major cities across the country revised zoning and building codes to force or encourage landlords to eliminate SRO units and to prohibit the development of new ones.

So the greedy landlords are the would-be heroes of the story and the politicians are the bad guys?
by akazantsev | 2025-08-06 20:37:19+00:00
True. Googled "how to auto switch dark theme bootstrap". AI says in "versions 5.3 and newer, you can leverage the data-bs-theme attribute and JavaScript." and shows `data-bs-theme="auto"`.

This attribute exists, but this value comes from a bootstrap plugin that you have to install separately. It generated quite a few clicks and high-quality searches from me.