MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by anwitars | 2025-08-18 13:08:41+00:00
I appreciate your feedback, and I completely agree with you that malicious users would immediately start to exploit it. Although I remain confident (for now), that the service's peek/info features help protecting innocent users from such activities. If it fails to deliver that safety, I will definitely implement something that you mentioned.

I would always love to hear feedback, so you should just reach out as well if you have anything in mind.
by bluGill | 2025-08-18 13:09:52+00:00
> But this view of a home as an appreciating asset is incompatible with increasing housing affordability.

It isn't, but it seems that way. If you pay your house off before/when you retire that means you live rent free (you still have property taxes and maintenance, but they are far cheaper than rent). Social security is the same either way. Your 401k and IRAs have maximum contributions and so again not having to pay rent means your retirement income is effectively higher.

A house as an appreciating asset is only good for retirement if/when you sell - but then you either need to invest that money and pay it out in rent which has also increased, or you need to buy a new house. There is also risk - if you go to a nursing home the house is treated special, but if you sell it the additional money is used to pay the nursing home before government kicks in. Which is to say that for retirement planning house values are meaningless.

An appreciating house is useful if like many people you "cash out refinance" I've seen many people refinance their house every few years to the current house value. They take very nice vacations paid for by the house increase in value. This is all good until they retire and now owe what the house is worth and so they are paying rent with their limited income.
by DinoStarcic | 2025-08-18 13:10:09+00:00
I’ve been thinking about a different kind of business model for DevOps services and wanted to get some feedback.

Instead of the usual hourly billing or project-based contracts, what if there was a productized AWS service, something like:

- $5,500/month - Unlimited DevOps work (within reason, of course, think ongoing support, CI/CD pipelines, infra as code, scaling setups, monitoring, etc.) - Clear scope, fast turnaround, predictable cost

I’ve seen a lot of Webflow/design agencies move to this “subscription model” where clients pay a fixed fee for unlimited requests, and it seems to work well for them.

I’m wondering if the same could apply in the DevOps/AWS space.

I have a solid team of experienced DevOps engineers, so bandwidth isn’t a problem. Mostly just exploring if this model would make sense to anyone here.

Appreciate any thoughts, even critical ones!
by jerf | 2025-08-18 13:10:21+00:00
Computers are fast. HTTP requests are not that hard. You have to go down to position 480-ish on the latest TechEmpower Fortune benchmark [1] to find a framework that is serving ~10,000 requests per second on this simple benchmark, and as that is running on a higher-spec system and possibly with more threads than "this guy's random laptop he had lying around" (although by the time you get that low in the benchmarks I suspect we're into single-thread-only frameworks) you could probably go to all but the last three to get something comparable in performance. (Yes, this is not a comparable task, because I'm making a point about speed of HTTP in general not static file serving.)

Also as mentioned nginx on a blog site will certainly not be hitting the disk.

Broadly speaking in 2025 if a website is slow it is 100% the fault of the app-specific code being run in the web request. I've been HN'd before on a very small VPS but since my blog is now all static content it doesn't even notice... even when it was making 4 or 5 DB reads per page it didn't notice. This web server is basically fast not because "it's fast" but simply because there's no reason for it to be slow. That's how computers are nowadays; you really have to give them a reason to be slow for a task like this.

You'd think everyone would know this but I fight a surprising amount of rule-of-thumb estimates from coworkers based on 2000 or 2010 performance of systems, even from developers who weren't developing then! It's really easy to not realize how much performance you're throwing away using a scripting language, and using multiple fancy runtime features that have multiplicative costs at runtime, and make bad use of databases with too many queries, that fail to do even basic optimizations on said databases, and come away thinking that 50 queries per second is a lot, when in fact in 2025 you hardly even need to consider the performance of the web requests themselves until you're into the range of interest until you're in the many thousands per core... and that's just when you need to start thinking about it.

Depending on what you are doing, of course, you may need to be considering how your code runs well before that, if your web requests are intrinsically expensive. But you don't need to worry about the web itself until at least that level of performance, and generally it'll be your code struggling to keep up, not the core web server or framework.

[1]: https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#section=data-r23
by bpt3 | 2025-08-18 13:10:35+00:00
You're talking about a theoretical problem in the future, while I assure you vibe coding and agent based coding is causing major issues today.

Today, LLMs make development faster, not better.

And I'd be willing to bet a lot of money they won't be significantly better than a competent human in the next decade, let alone the next couple years. See self-driving cars as an example that supports my position, not yours.
by amadeuspagel | 2025-08-18 13:10:42+00:00
This is one of the many cases where the dishonest rationalization of a selfish act is worse then the act itself. I block ads because it's convenient, but I don't deny that I'm free-riding on websites that only exist because other people view ads, I don't pollute our shared understanding of ethics, economics and the web with some bullshit rationalization of something I only do because it's convenient.
by Jensson | 2025-08-18 13:11:24+00:00
> Why would it not be possible for a highly generalizing model to use next token prediction for its output?

The issue is that it uses next token prediction for its training, it doesn't matter how it outputs things but it matters how its trained.

As long as these models are trained to be next token predictors you will always be able to find flaws with it that are related to it being a next token predictor, so understanding that is how they work really makes them much easier to use.

So since it is so easy to get the model to make errors due to it being trained to just predict tokens people argue that is proof they aren't really thinking. Like, any extremely common piece of text when altered slightly will typically still output the same follow-up as the text it has seen millions of times even though it makes no logical sense. That is due to them being next token predictors instead of reasoning machines.

You might say its unfair to abuse their weaknesses as next token predictors, but then you admit that being a next token predictor interferes with their ability to reason, which was the argument you said you don't understand.
by jamesponddotco | 2025-08-18 13:11:50+00:00
Another great security feature systemd provides is credential management[1], which allows you to expose credentials to an application in a more secure way than, say, an environment variable or a file in the filesystem.

When Vault is not available, if I’m working on a side project, for example, that’s what I always go for. Even wrote a small Go package[2] to get said credentials when your application is running inside a service with that feature.

[1]: https://systemd.io/CREDENTIALS/

[2]: https://sr.ht/~jamesponddotco/credential-go/
by UtopiaPunk | 2025-08-18 13:11:54+00:00
I think you listed great positives for ownership. I would agree with those. But the parent is correct that, at least in the USA, owning a home is considered a financial investment that should appreciate in value. I think treating a house as a financial investment leads to all kinds of bad outcomes, and here we are.

"People don't say home ownership is important because it's an asset for retirement; if you sold it, you wouldn't have a home in retirement!"

It's very common in the USA. A married couple has some kids and buys a house big enough to accommodate them comfortably. 20ish years later, the kids have moved out and the parents don't need such a big house. They also are about to or have recently retired, and they would like to stretch their retirement money. Sell the big house, make a lot of money, and then buy a smaller, cheaper house. In the USA this pattern is pretty common.
by enraged_camel | 2025-08-18 13:12:45+00:00
>> I feel like there has to be an effort at all layers of government to solve this structural problem where a few homes can derail a democratic process.

What you describe is not a structural problem. On the contrary, it is precisely how a constitutional, rule-of-law system is meant to work.

Democracy does not mean pure majority rule. Our system is a constitutional democracy. Majorities make policy, but minority rights and legal limits constrain how they do it. Courts are there to enforce these limits even when a policy is popular.

Judicial review is part of the design. Reviewing legislative and administrative actions for legality is a built-in check and balance, not a veto by randos. The courts exist to ensure the other branches do not skip required steps or exceed their authorities.

More specifically, the legal concept of "standing" prevents this from being arbitrary. In most contexts, you cannot sue just because you dislike a decision. You must show concrete injury, such as living next to an affected area. That's why a "few households" can file: they're the ones with legally cognizable stakes.

Now, I will grant that in places like California with decades of existing laws, NIMBYs have done an excellent job figuring out exactly what buttons to press and what levers to pull to get their way. But this is not a flaw in the system. It just means that they have read all the manuals (because they are very strong incentivized, financially, to do so) and are now using it competently, even if it is self-serving and sometimes even in bad faith. But other locales have figured out the solutions to this problem. The article gives one such example: Austin, TX.
by thrance | 2025-08-18 13:13:11+00:00
Why, after decades of failing against NYMBYs, are people so confident they can have any more success against NYMBYism as a whole? Homes are assets, and as such people and corporations who own homes really don't want them to depreciate, or even stop appreciating. Homeowners own the majority of this country's wealth, and since modern politics are entirely subservient to capital, the current situation makes perfect sense. Thinking it will only take a bit of deregulation to fix this mess seems foolish to me. Whatever the solution is, it will necessarily involve something more radical than tweaking a few numbers on a spreadsheet, and will require front-facing capital interests (something no political party is currently willing to engage in, not the democrats and certainly not the republicans).
by saghm | 2025-08-18 13:13:14+00:00
> Polish notation is easy for both to parse; humans only struggle because they’re not so familiar with it

I think you're downplaying the significance of this. The lack of familiarity is exactly what I'd argue makes a huge difference in practice even if theoretically the way our brains parse things isn't that different. We spend so much time reading and writing words that it requires effort to learn how to parse each specific symbol-oriented thing we might want to learn how to read. To add to the parent comment's examples, I'll throw in Brainfuck, which is an extremely simple language for a machine to learn to parse that's literally named for how impenetrable it looks to people at first glance.

"Simple if I spend the time to learn it" is not the same as "simple without having to spend time to learn it", and for some things, the fact that the syntax essentially ignores some of the finer details is the main feature rather than a drawback. When everyone I work with can read and write markdown good enough for us not to have major issues, and junior engineers can get up to basically the same level of competence in it without needing a lot of hand holding, it's just not worth the effort for me to try to convince everyone to use RST even if it is better in theory. The total amount of time I've spent dealing with the minor annoyances in markdown in my life is less than the amount of time it would probably take me to convince even one of my coworkers that we should switch all of our READMEs to RST.
by the__alchemist | 2025-08-18 13:13:18+00:00
I think this depends on the context. For your epidemiologist perspective, or looking at populations, that's a big rate! (Given how much metformin is taken) Would be easy to find people who suffer from it.

From the perspective of "Should I be worried about side effects from taking this drug / should I not take this because it might give me this effect", I think this falls under "be aware of symptoms and stop or weigh the costs if you get it, but you're probably fine".
by potato3732842 | 2025-08-18 13:13:28+00:00
The vibe this stuff gives off to me is the "environmentally friendly" materials racket wherein some jerks lobby for some public/private rule/requirement change that's favorable to some product on the basis of the environment and that product is only marginally better for the environment (usually because it takes a recycled thing as one of its inputs) while being substantially more expensive/less performant per dollar. But the people pushing for the change don't care because are or are paid by the people who make the new thing that wouldn't have seen serious adoption without the change favorable to it.
by chrismorgan | 2025-08-18 13:14:08+00:00
I’ve frequently seen mistakes in Markdown syntax that lead to content that has at best partially-broken formatting, at worst losing some of the content, sometimes even in ways that aren’t obvious.

Markup versus computer code is of course not exactly the same, but the nature of the mistakes—tokens in places they’re not supposed to be, and such—would generally lead to a syntax error in C++.
by kriops | 2025-08-18 13:14:28+00:00
> I think of it more like self driving cars.

Analogous to the way I think of self-driving cars is the way I think of fusion: perpetually a few years away from a 'real' breakthrough.

There is currently no reason to believe that LLMs cannot acquire the ability to write secure code in the most prevalent use cases. However, this is contingent upon the availability of appropriate tooling, likely a Rust-like compiler. Furthermore, there's no reason to think that LLMs will become useful tools for validating the security of applications at either the model or implementation level—though they can be useful for detecting quick wins.
by mothballed | 2025-08-18 13:14:47+00:00
I don't follow. USA has made laws, say, that owning most explosives without a tax stamp is illegal (interestingly there is a law that this same stamp is $0 for other weapons which put people in a precarious position of facing 10+ years in prison for not paying a $0 tax). If you happen to already have one before they passed the law, the law still applies to you, just not before the law goes into effect. And they might not even give you the stamp even if you try to pay for it, if you don't pass a check. They won't charge you for the time you had it before the law went into effect. But they will charge you for owning it today without the tax stamp. (Now you can argue that law is unconstitutional, either from the takings clause or 2A but not because it is retroactive).

That's kind of how I see the housing law. It would not be retroactive. It would be, that tomorrow owning a house without a sprinkler system would be illegal. And anyone who possess the house without one is violating the law. And if you don't agree with equal application to everyone, maybe the law should not be there in the first place.
by CLPadvocate | 2025-08-18 13:14:52+00:00
Most probably not - but there is also absolutely no need for chivalry if your opponent doesn't stick to any rules.

The point was not the war declaration or the lack of it - the point is - if someone announces he's going to kill you and then does basically everything to prove that it's not a bluff and no one else is stopping him, then you're allowed to do whatever it takes to save your life.
by bluGill | 2025-08-18 13:15:13+00:00
Even if property tax increases are not capped, they are generally a fraction of what the house payment would be. (though after 30+ years of inflation the tax is what the original house payment was)

Generally if you rent your share of property tax in the rent payment is higher than an equivalent house share would be Tenters don't see how property tax affects their rent and so they generally don't oppose property tax increases, if they even bother to vote which they are less likely to. To be fair, how tax affects tax is complex - rent is supply and demand first, things like taxes put a floor on prices and so affect supply but this means it is indirect and so hard to see even though it will catch up eventually.
by aaronjanse | 2025-08-18 13:15:47+00:00
I wrote a 2d esolang called asciidots inspired by ascii art and circuits, where “dots” follow ascii art paths and undergo operations. I posted it to Show HN a while back (2017!), where it ended up getting attention on HN and elsewhere.

Since then, I used Pyodide to make a home page with an interactive demo of the language. This let me use the existing Python reference implementation of asciidots in the browser, allowing exact feature parity (bugs and all) to support existing code. As a fun trick, I used a CSS animation for the logo instead of a GIF so it wouldn’t freeze while Pyodide is loading.
by whamlastxmas | 2025-08-18 13:16:10+00:00
Being charged the same percentage of income is still the same punishment. It’s a non-controversial concept in economics that there is a marginal utility to money, as in, if you have a billion dollars, then getting an extra hundred doesn’t give you more utility. However a struggling family would be thrilled at a hundred bucks and maybe that means eating for the next several days. These people should not be charged with the same static dollar amount.
by pjmlp | 2025-08-18 13:16:26+00:00
Additionally, designed for 2015 hardware capabilities, with JavaScript in mind, in a sandboxed environment.

Some folks are reaching out to WebGPU outside the browser, because Vulkan is a pain to program for, and they misuse WebGPU as middleware, although a less capable one, due to its original design, and who is driving its standardisation process.

Regarding SYCL, Intel basically bought the only company that was shipping a good developer experience for it, CodePlay, which used to do specialized compilers for game consoles, and pivoted into GPGPU.
by StopDisinfo910 | 2025-08-18 13:16:38+00:00
It’s pretty interesting.

I see a ton of potential for testing. RPA can quickly get annoying because even simple change can break automation. The LLM ability to “reason” could really bridge the gap.

Coupled with agents who help turn specification/stories into a testing plan, I could really see automated end to end testing becoming far cheaper than it is nowadays in the near future.

That’s a very good piece of news for system reliability.
by Tade0 | 2025-08-18 13:16:51+00:00
Finally some news regarding this research. I first heard about it back in 2019 when there was an ACS panel featuring it:

https://www.youtube.com/live/Dw9D7C8CpM0?si=e-KJ8J2u_oVy4RvM

Originally there was a mention of developing a less invasive method of correcting a deviated septum, but I guess they went with the harder problem first.

In any case I'm up for both, because while my vision is not terrible, it's slowly, but consistently getting worse, so max-twice-a-lifetime interventions like laser eye surgery won't cut it for me.
by throw0101a | 2025-08-18 13:17:08+00:00
>> Only to have it all screwed up by 2-3 households that sued, pausing the zoning and throwing a wrench into a lot of new housing construction.

> Democracy does not mean pure majority rule. Our system is a constitutional democracy. Majorities make policy, but minority rights and legal limits constrain how they do it. Courts are there to enforce these limits even when a policy is popular.

When the minority is 20-30 percent you may have a point, when it's 2-3 people then that's just obstructionism.
Show HN: Skin Max – An acne tracking and treatment app
by Borsoon | 2025-08-18 13:17:10+00:00
Hi HN,

I’m a high school student in Poland, and I’ve struggled with acne for most of my life. I built Skin Max because I wanted something that would help me learn about acne treatment and staying consistent. Working on the app has also helped me change my own habits like not touching my face as much, washing it regularly, eating cleaner, drinking more water, and sticking to some treatment products.

This is the first mobile app I’ve fully built on my own. Right now it’s only available on iOS, but if people are interested, I’ll release it on Android too.

What the app does: • You can scan your face, and it gives you an acne score. • It tracks your skin over time so you can see progress (or setbacks). • It suggests treatments and products, with details like best for what acne and skin type. • The goal is to make progress more visible and motivate you to keep going.

App Store: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/skin-max-ai-skin-scanner/id674... Website: https://skinmax.site/ (Product Hunt: https://www.producthunt.com/products/skin-max)

I’d really appreciate feedback. Both on the product itself and on the way I approached tracking/consistency. Thanks!
by intended | 2025-08-18 13:17:13+00:00
Your submission was earnest, but it’s also impossible to answer fairly, because your framing is not neutral.

Many people will argue that they do good at Meta, and that they strive to do good. Their results probably are good too - meta is vast so statistically you will find good work and good outcomes.

Those people are already painted as evil, so why would they engage with the question ? Even if you are genuine and earnest?
by everforward | 2025-08-18 13:17:52+00:00
I can't speak to Sophie specifically, but I have known a couple of people who were dishonest with their therapists specifically for fear of mandatory reporting rules.

I think both were wrong about meeting the bar for an involuntary in-patient evaluation, but this is nowhere near my expertise. To my understanding, passive suicidal thoughts don't trigger it, only active planning.

I don't really have a point here, just sharing anecdata. I have no idea or opinion on what the real tradeoffs here are.
by Kim_Bruning | 2025-08-18 13:18:08+00:00
Earlier discussion on the "ChatGPT chats in google" angle:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44778764

Interesting how much traction

"[x] Make this chat discoverable (allows it to be shown in web searches)"

gets in news articles.

People don't seem to have the same intuition for the web that they used to!
by CalRobert | 2025-08-18 13:18:26+00:00
I agree this is a good plan, but many places make this illegal (Ireland, for instance), because if people weren't forced in to life-long debt servitude to have a roof over their head they might exhibit too much agency.

Here's a nice website showing how to build a nice, modest home for under 50k. Too bad it's illegal. https://web.archive.org/web/20210216212333/https://www.irish...