MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by fencepost | 2025-08-19 16:38:09+00:00
There's also something called the "Chargie" (chargie.org) which is basically the same capability but connected on the USB side of things. I assume it's Bluetooth controlled, and it seems to have a bunch of other charge control options including rate limiting. Probably a lot more important back in 2019 when they released it, and probably relevant now for people who want more control (or laptop control with one model, though I suspect a lot of USB-PD laptops can cap charge and you might not want the laptop cycling power on and off).
by kg | 2025-08-19 16:38:45+00:00
It's not a huge conspiracy, but it is worthwhile to consider what the incentives are for people from each browser vendor. In practice all the vendors probably have big backlogs of work they are struggling to keep up with. The backlogs are accumulating in part because of the breakneck pace at which new APIs and features are added to the web platform, and in part because of the unending torrent of new security vulnerabilities being discovered in existing parts of the platform. Anything that reduces the backlog is thus really appealing, and money doesn't have to change hands.

Arguably, we could lighten the load on all three teams (especially the under-resourced Firefox and Safari teams) by slowing the pace of new APIs and platform features. This would also ease development of browsers by new teams, like Servo or Ladybird. But this seems to be an unpopular stance because people really (for good reason) want the web platform to have every pet feature they're an advocate for. Most people don't have the perspective necessary to see why a slower pace may be necessary.
by rimunroe | 2025-08-19 16:39:25+00:00
> Does not ranked matchmaking make for more competitive matches, a bit like if you play ranked in lichess it matches with someone of your own level, and you have a real chance of improving your own level over a period of time.

I don't like playing a game where I need to worry about ranking systems. It adds a layer which I'm just not interested in. It's fine if I die more often than other people. Some of my fondest memories are of watching someone much more skilled than me absolutely steamroll my team. If you're playing with people you know, a vastly more skilled player becomes a fun challenge for you to try and overcome together.
by dylan604 | 2025-08-19 16:39:31+00:00
At my home, it is so light polluted, I don't even bother with attempts at zenith objects. I joke about every hotel in town is a 5-star hotel because you can literally only see 5 stars at night. With a 4 hour drive, I can be in one of the darkest spots in the state. To get to the darkest, it would be at least 8 hours. Either way though, it's Texas, so the high temps play havoc on image quality.
by adregan | 2025-08-19 16:40:08+00:00
Is the q solution equivalent? In doing a plus scan, isn't the last element always going to be the largest? To find the largest subarray sum, I would think you'd want to split into a matrix along the `null`s first and then plus reduction and then a max of those results.

Say what you will about clarity, but my mind sort of glossed over the intention in the python and rust code, focusing instead on the syntax, while the q code made me consider what was actually happening.
by krapp | 2025-08-19 16:40:28+00:00
It's a consequence of javascript being "good enough." Originally, the goal was for the web to support multiple languages (I think one prototype of the <script> tag had a "type=text/tcl") and IE supported VBScript for a while.

But at the end of the day, you only really need one, and the type attribute was phased out of the script tag entirely, and Javascript won.
by entropicdrifter | 2025-08-19 16:41:07+00:00
The US has 28 empty homes for every homeless person.

It's a market manipulation problem that's not going to go away for as long as we maintain the perverse incentive of using real estate as an investment vehicle. Japan has never had this problem and likely never will because housing depreciates in value there like cars. A 30-year-old house is often worthless or near-worthless in Japan.
by delneg | 2025-08-19 16:41:12+00:00
What if the "modern" web is overly complex for most use cases? I'm sharing a project, a website for a product studio "Bearle", that was built on what I'd call a "2025 Stack" - a return to simplicity. It's a fully functional single-page application built with:

No React, Vue, or Angular. No Webpack, Vite, or Parcel. No npm or bun.

Just plain old HTML <template> elements and vanilla JavaScript to handle routing and dynamic content. The result is a website that is incredibly fast, easy to deploy, and simple to maintain.

Have we gone too far with our complex toolchains? For many projects, is a simple, no-build, no-framework approach like this one a more sensible choice?
by lubujackson | 2025-08-19 16:41:19+00:00
To add to these good points - for bigger changes, don't just have LLMs restructure your prompt, but break it down into a TODO list, a summary and/or build a scaffolded result then continue from that. LLMs thrive in structure, and the more architectural you can make both your inputs and outputs, the more consistent your results will be.

For example, pass an LLM a JSON structure with keys but no values and it tends to do a much better job populating the values than trying to fully generate complex data from a prompt alone. Then you can take that populated JSON to do something even more complex in a second prompt.
by psavnani | 2025-08-19 16:42:04+00:00
Hi Everyone! I built an open-source video conferencing platform that actually remembers your meetings. Think Zoom + Granola!

Core features: - AI assistant that is present in every call and answers questions about meetings. - Real-time transcription and AI-generated summaries + tasks. - High quality video conferencing with LiveKit.

Why? Zoom's AI copilot doesn't work. Google Meet has zero memory. I wanted something intelligent, hackable, and truly open.

Demo: https://www.auranow.co/ GitHub: https://github.com/savnani5/aura

Feedback and contributions welcome! Thanks :)
by WorldMaker | 2025-08-19 16:42:30+00:00
They weren't sidelined because they had bad ideas (XHTML 2.0 had a lot of great ideas, many of which HTML5 eventually "borrowed"), they were sidelined because they still saw the web as primarily a document platform and Google especially was trying to push it as a larger application platform. It wasn't a battle between the ivory tower and practical concerns, it was a proxy battle in the general war between the web as a place optimized to link between meaningful, accessibility-first documents and the web as a place to host generalized applications with accessibility often an afterthought. (ARIA is great, but ARIA can only do so much, not as much of it by default/a pit of success as XHTML 2.0 once hoped to be.)
by inetknght | 2025-08-19 16:42:56+00:00
> You can register list of held futexes with the kernel using sys_set_robust_list, and when the thread dies kernel for each entry will set a specific bit and wake waiter if there's one.

My biggest worry with that kind of thing is that the lock was guarding something which is now in an inconsistent state.

Without thoroughly understanding how/why the particular thread crashed, there's no guarantee that the data is in any sort of valid or recoverable state. In that case, crashing the whole app is absolutely a better thing to do.

It's really cool that the capabilities exist to do cleanup/recovery after a single thread crashed. But I think (off-the-cuff guess) that 95% of engineers won't know how to properly utilize robust locks with robust data structures, 4% won't have the time to engineer (including documentation) that kind of solution, and the last 1% are really really well-paid (or, should be) and would find better ways to prevent the crash from happening in the first place.
by like_any_other | 2025-08-19 16:43:04+00:00
"Something something government" being:

1. I want to keep a secret.

2. If I share my secret with this person, they are legally bound to reveal it.

3. Therefore I will not share it with this person.

There may be additional reasons, but worrying about them is like worrying about a broken leg while your patient is flatlining - utterly useless until you fix the main problem. So yes, your thinking is crippled.
by moritzwarhier | 2025-08-19 16:43:24+00:00
But at the same time, people don't want web pages and web apps to become all fully opaque like Flutter web or complex, minified JS-heavy sites. Even the latter have many a11y benefits of markup.

I think that's a tradeoff.

Simplest approach would be to just distribute programs, but the Web is more than that!

Another simple approach would be to have only HTML and CSS, or even only HTML, or something like Markdown, or HTML + a different simple styling language...

and yet nothing of that would offer the features that make web development so widespread as a universal document and application platform.
by ajross | 2025-08-19 16:44:01+00:00
Futex is a fine solution for locks and semaphores (FUTEX_WAIT/WAKE operations). It's been extended repeatedly to handle the needs of condition variables, priority inheritance, timeouts, interop with file descriptors and async/io_uring, etc... with the result that a lot of the API exists to support newer operations with oddball semantics and not a few genuine mistakes and traps (often undocumented). See the glibc condition variable code for how complicated this can get.

Also, while googling for some examples for you I was reminded of this LWN article from a few years back that details some of the issues: https://lwn.net/Articles/823513/
by geocar | 2025-08-19 16:44:25+00:00
> This is actually not a bad idea. Why should the browser contain a specific template engine, like XSLT

XSLT is a specification for a "template engine" and not a specific engine. There are dozens of XSLT implementations.

Mozilla notably doesn't use libxslt but transformiix: https://web.mit.edu/ghudson/dev/nokrb/third/firefox/extensio...

> and not Jinja for example?

Jinja operates on text, so it's basically document.write(). XSLT works on the nodes itself. That's better.

> Also it can be reimplemented using JS or WASM.

Sort of. JS is much slower than the native XSLT transform, and the XSLT result is cacheable. That's huge.

I think if you view XSLT as nothing more than ancient technology that nobody uses, then I can see how you could think this is ok, but I've been looking at it as a secret weapon: I've been using it for the last twenty years because it's faster than everything else.

I bet Google will try and solve this problem they're creating by pushing AMP again...

> The browsers today are too bloated

No, Google's browser today is too bloated: That's nobody's fault but Google.

> and it is difficult to create a new browser engine

I don't recommend confusing difficult to create with difficult to sell unless you're looking for a reason to not do something: There's usually very little overlap between the two in the solution.
by benoau | 2025-08-19 16:44:42+00:00
I think they're well on the path of replacing the "legacy" development structure with entirely closed, iOS-only app development since Swift Playgrounds 4:

https://screenrant.com/publish-ios-apps-ipad-swift-playgroun...

To me it feels like a waiting game - most people under 20 have lived their entire lives within "walled gardens" aka "what's a computer". The EU has already failed to break this cycle, if the DOJ can't do better and Apple can derail smaller countries efforts then this restrictive model will become entrenched as normal over the next two decades.
by os2warpman | 2025-08-19 16:45:45+00:00
Interesting. Extremely interesting.

reclaimthenet.org appears, at first, to be a pro-free speech site.

But they only publish stories that support the current US administration's stance that conservatives are being oppressed and persecuted.

And there are absolutely no stories critical of the steps the current administration has taken to curb free speech and expression.

And on several articles (I read a lot of that trash, unfortunately, trying to analyze it) they refer to efforts to install solar panels as "trying to block out the sun". Two different (apparently) authors used this very specific phrase as a stand-in for "solar panels".

And every single author I looked at appears to be fake with just "Cam Wakefield" having any other editorial presence on the entire internet, at a Christian anti-lgbt ragebait AI-slop website.

And the authors are very prolific, thousands of words a day, every day, non-stop.

All of the articles are the same approximate length, read very similarly, and very, very, very few of them (that I've seen and I've seen a shit-ton) have any links whatsoever to any website except other pages on reclaimthenet.org leading to loops of ragebaiting.

And there are absolutely no traces of who is behind the site, how it is funded, and the only common threads I can find, sprinkled judiciously just enough to be noticed but not enough to turn off normal people who don't look deeper, to try to explain what this site is is an obsessive (and secretive) focus on Great Britain and the United States and attempts to tackle hate speech and bigotry from the far Christian right.

My final analysis, especially based on the authors' off-site posts, is that they really, really, REALLY hate from the bottom of their hate-filled hearts, any trans or gay person and they hate even more when companies, governments, or other individuals say: "hey you're not allowed to write 'trans people should kill themselves' that is against our rules". And that this entire effort is fake, designed to stir up outrage to build pressure or support for legislative moves designed at first glance to "free da speech" but are really designed to limit peoples' right to say "gtfo bigot".

Or, cynically, it's just a rage-fueled fundraising exercise for persons unknown.

Very interesting.
by feoren | 2025-08-19 16:45:59+00:00
Have you seen the list of books fascists want to ban? I think GP's point was exactly to emphasize that when we're talking about "dangerous books", we're talking about books that indicate you might not be a toe-lining member of The Party. We're talking about any book that any powerful person decides is some sort of threat, even if it's merely a threat to their ego.
by robenkleene | 2025-08-19 16:46:21+00:00
There are a couple of problems with the argument you're making:

1. Any app can be sandboxed, not just Mac App Store apps (the only link is that Mac App Store apps require sandboxing).

2. Enforcing sandboxing on macOS would hinder industries Mac users value, per my comment here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44952088 Apple would love to enforce sandboxing by default, because it would serve their long-term strategic goals (moving computing towards devices that benefit from integrated software/hardware), but it hurts their short-term goals (maintaining Apple's [somewhat tenuous these days] penetration across a variety of particularly creative industries) too much to do so.
by ketzo | 2025-08-19 16:47:12+00:00
> While running the exploit, CodeRabbit would still review our pull request and post a comment on the GitHub PR saying that it detected a critical security risk, yet the application would happily execute our code because it wouldn’t understand that this was actually running on their production system.

What a bizarre world we're living in, where computers can talk about how they're being hacked while it's happening.

Also, this is pretty worrisome:

> Being quick to respond and remediate, as the CodeRabbit team was, is a critical part of addressing vulnerabilities in modern, fast-moving environments. Other vendors we contacted never responded at all, and their products are still vulnerable. [emphasis mine]

Props to the CodeRabbit team, and, uh, watch yourself out there otherwise!
by codedokode | 2025-08-19 16:47:25+00:00
Interesting, I also had an idea of "sandbox mode", into which the page can voluntarily switch after loading and which prevents it from using network, cookies or any ways to exfiltrate the data. This can be used for online utilities like text encryption, audio file format conversion etc. The browser could indicate that the page is in a sandbox mode so that the user can trust it.
by the_af | 2025-08-19 16:47:45+00:00
Can't people simply misremember or misunderstand the story? I've seen more than once (and been accused of the same sin, to be fair) someone completely getting the point of a story backwards, no need to involve AI!

I found myself in agreement that Ted Chiang is one of the best scifi writers alive today, but disagreed with other points (that his understanding of then-current LLMs was weak -- I thought Chiang's lossy compression metaphor was on point -- or that he should somehow optimize his output to write more stories -- something one of the commenters from TFA deftly rebutts), but I still think it's a human who wrote most of the article.

Happy to be corrected by the author if he wrote it using LLMs. I'm not immune to being fooled; my objection to LLMs is not "they aren't good enough" but instead "I want to talk to humans, not bots".
by jgiraldo29 | 2025-08-19 16:48:08+00:00
Hello! Thank you for your question.

To start with, yes. Originally the project was going to be decentralized to exactly stop that from happening, but as time went on I realized how it quickly became overcomplicated. So it was either implementing a P2P model or going the centralized route.

Now, to the second point. This network is not aiming to be Tor. Tor is global, it has a basis in fog. This does not operate in the case of someone that needs complete anonymity from each other. It operated instead under the principle of inherent trust. This means, the project was designed so that with and only with trusted people the nodes can be released. So the whole security model for the nodes is not like Tor which is based on mathematical probabilities. Instead it is based in the social quality of trust.

So for example, imagine a journalist in country x. They need to contact their outlet in a foreign country, without their activity being monitored by the country's ISP.

Using a VPN? Can be risky, VPNs are by itself a highway, that is completely traceable even if encrypted because again, it is a highway.

Maybe Tor? Tor can give a higher level of security, but the public nature of tor can mark it as suspicious. There are global databases with the common Tor addresses, a lot of websites have well developed anti-Tor measures, so country x can also exactly know this. The government wouldn't know what they are doing, but it would undoubtedly raise suspicions.

So it works this way. The journalist, and other 5 people set up GiralNet. Three can set up the nodes in different locations/places(even foreign countries. They then register to the central authority running in another server. So the journalist wants to browse a topic, the proxy then builds a three hop circuit. The journey of the browser is randomized thanks to it, and their traffic is encrypted like the onion network does it.

This can help because it avoids flagging as it will appear from a "normal" ip address. No single node can also link their IP address to their browsing activity as the exit node doesn't know who they are, and the local ISP doesn't know where it is going.

The final, is accountance. The biggest security failure point here is, social trust itself. IF one of the nodes is run by, well a malicious actor, it can compromise the network. This becomes less of a technical and more of a, knowing who to trust kind of thing.

Basically, that's why I designed it that way.
by dralley | 2025-08-19 16:48:10+00:00
>I have long suspected that Google gives so much money to Mozilla both for the default search option, but also for massive indirect control to deliberately cripple Mozilla in insidious ways to massively reduce Firefox's marketshare.

This has never ever made sense because Mozilla is not at all afraid to piss in Google's cheerios at the standards meetings. How many different variations of Flock and similar adtech oriented features did they shoot down? It's gotta be at least 3. Not to mention the anti-fingerprinting tech that's available in Firefox (not by default because it breaks several websites) and opposition to several Google-proposed APIs on grounds of fingerprinting. And keeping Manifest V2 around indefinitely for the adblockers.

People just want a conspiracy, even when no observed evidence actually supports it.

>And I have long predicted that Google is going to make the rate of change needed in web standards so high that orgs like Mozilla can't keep up and then implode/become unusable.

That's basically true whether incidentally or on purpose.
by everdrive | 2025-08-19 16:48:29+00:00
>If the Dems can’t take back the house in the midterms then it’s game over but for now

And if they do, what happens in the next 2-4 years if they lose power again? I'm not really weighing in on the specific political issues here, but wondering what we do about extreme pendulum swings every few years as the government changes parties.
by jauntywundrkind | 2025-08-19 16:48:35+00:00
Anti-circumvention laws are heinous. Governments look like absolute fools giving legal backing to this absurd premise that people have no right to modify or change the world about them. We can re-paint a car, rip a page out of a book.

The idea that a page that's been copied over to us must sacrosanctly be viewed only as intended is absurd. Our speech rights must grant us a right to use tools to view and see things as we might dream, not merely as provided to us.

The war within the Declaration of Independence of Cyberspace has really really come to a roiling boil in the past couple years, with all sorts of states trying to declare control over how their populations connect to the global information system. In 95% of cases, I think it makes the state look like an absolute fool.

And very rarely is it being done in accordance with the will of the states people, which is quite chilling!! So called democratic states, with elite capture, doing ill against the free thinking world. These are losers, professional idiots at best, an actively working against humanity for shitty shady hidden motives more likely alas. They are losers, and while this will likely only intensify & make the world tenser and worse and obstructed and jammed up, I have some faith that they will continue to lose their war, that JP Barlow's triumphalism over their shitty ways will keep proving out. These people are idiots, and powerless, and the courts trying to enforce these bad unenforceable dumb laws only illegitemizes the idea of governance. Which I believe strongly in, and want to be a force for good!! But alas, not here.
by righthand | 2025-08-19 16:49:20+00:00
Again no I can’t afford eggs. I eat other things besides eggs. I’ve chosen to stop buying eggs so I can afford other proteins.

It’s a perfectly good example you’re just trying to find a way to dunk on me about eggs. I’m not talking about just eggs though, I’m talking about groceries in general.

Stop rewriting my intent and commentary.