MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by viraptor | 2025-08-16 09:16:56+00:00
Nobody claimed it validates the identity in any way. It validates that the person at the other website confirms it's their social account and the social account matches the other direction. The real identity is not involved here in any way and never was. You're disagreeing with someone nobody here raises.

But the link validation confirms that if you believed that the original download site belongs to the author, then you would have almost the same guarantee about the social account. (+/- the chances of the putty website being hacked)
by socalgal2 | 2025-08-16 09:17:05+00:00
Do you live in SF (the city, not the Bay Area as a whole) or West LA? I ask because in these areas you can stand on any city street and see several self driving cars go by every few minutes.

It's irrlevant that they've had a few issues. They already work and people love them. It's clear they will eventually replace every uber/lyft driver, probably every taxi driver, they'll likely replace every doordash/grubhub driver with vehicles design to let smaller automated delivery carts go the last few blocks. They may also replace every truck driver. Together that's around 5 million jobs in the USA.

Once they're let on the freeways their usage will expand even faster.
by afro88 | 2025-08-16 09:18:36+00:00
Artists: photography. Yet we still value art in pre photography mediums

Writers: film, tv. Yet we all still read books

Play actors: again, film and tv. Yet we still go to plays, musicals etc

Teachers: the internet, software, video etc. Yet teachers are still essential (though they need to be paid more)

Jobs won't go away, they will change.
by mft_ | 2025-08-16 09:18:40+00:00
An aside, but:

> Alas, after the deal was done EA promptly started to pull Molyneux in way too many directions for his liking. He was given a set of executive titles and the executive suite to go along with it, removing him from the day-to-day work in the trenches. <snip> Molyneux was painfully ill-equipped for the role of a glad-handing EA vice president; it just made him uncomfortable and miserable.

I see this all of the time in corporate life: the assumption that someone is good at one role, so they must be suited to the next role up, even if the requirements are entirely different. It's such a shame that we're not better at figuring this out as a race, as it leads to so much friction with people being promoted to roles they're not suited to for a variety of reasons, and the negative organisational consequences as a result.
by willguest | 2025-08-16 09:20:45+00:00
> A norm around consensus-based decision-making discouraged compromise from all countries

So, a maladaptive systemic influence was noted, but they continued to focus on lower-level discussions around plastics. When will we start to see that it is the communication protocols that are driving this failure, and that good-faith bargaining is a fallacy, when there is profit to be made? I would like to know how this is being addressed, and which other proposals have been made that represent alternative routes to progress - specifically ones that do not require vested interest to forego their short-term benefits in favour of others' long-term needs.

> But only one speaker was able to give a statement before the United States and Kuwait asked the chair to cut them off and conclude the meeting

If the observers' voices are so important, why schedule them for the very end? Yet another structural failing that demonstrates that the scale of thinking and organisation being employed is insufficient for the stated task.
by yapyap | 2025-08-16 09:22:35+00:00
Well this is a pseudo-smart article if I’ve ever seen one.

“It was not even clear that we were so near to create machines that could understand the human language, write programs, and find bugs in a complex code base”

The author is critical of the professionals in AI saying “ even the most prominent experts in the field failed miserably again and again to modulate the expectations” yet without a care sets the expectation of LLMs understanding human language in the first paragraph.

Also it’s a lot of if this then that, the summary of it would be: if AI can continue to grow it might become all encompassing.

To me it reads like a baseless article written by someone blinded by their love for AI to see what a good blogpost is but not yet blinded enough to claim ‘AGI is right around the corner’. Pretty baseless but safe enough to have it rest on conditionals.
by strogonoff | 2025-08-16 09:23:06+00:00
I wish people running OpenAI and similar companies read Do Things That Don’t Scale and took it seriously. With the amount of money at their disposal, they could honestly license their training data and not engage in piracy. Unfortunately, they preferred to do things that do scale (scrape & steal), in the hopes that if they do as much as possible as sneakily and quickly as possible they’ll get away with it, and the question about paying people who are unwitting ghost content producers for their commercial software would never come up until it’s too late.
by cesaref | 2025-08-16 09:23:47+00:00
This situation happens with plenty of compilers for plenty of languages. It's just software after all, we don't expect any software to be perfect, so why expect compilers to be perfect?

As for deprecating old C++, yes, I can see the appeal, but no, the community hasn't gone that route. C++ has always been a 'mix and match' approach, with different parts of the community using more or less of the language features, with the intention being that you can choose what to adopt when, and move older code bases forward (or not!) depending on individual concerns.

It's one of the C++ strengths, although it doesn't always feel like it.
by usernamed7 | 2025-08-16 09:24:06+00:00
One thing i would add, is that a well designed system is often one that is optimized for change. It is rare that a service remains static and unchanging; browsers and libraries are regularly updated, after all. Thus if/when a developer takes on a feature ticket to add or change XYZ, it should be easy to reason about and have predictable side-effects of how that change will impact the system, and ideally be easy to change as well.
by azan_ | 2025-08-16 09:24:40+00:00
> AI can displace human work but not human accountability. It has no skin and faces no consequences.

Let’s assume that we have amazing aj and robotics, better than humans at everything - if you could choose between robosurgery (completely automatic) with 1% mortality and for 5000 usd vs surgery performed by human with 10% mortality and 50000 usd price tag, would you really choose human just because you can sue him? I wouldn’t. I don’t thing anyone thinking rationally would.
by JdeBP | 2025-08-16 09:24:46+00:00
I recently, by playing around with the LAN's default PAC file and a dummy HTTP server, discovered that on a machine that says in System Settings that Proxy Auto-Discovery is turned off, the PAC file is still fetched and used by a too-large number of Microsoft/Google background auto-update services, from Windows Update to Office.

* https://mastodonapp.uk/@JdeBP/114693762493884550

I had been lucky through having done my own experimentation, decades ago, with setting up a default PAC file on the LAN and having left it in just-send-everything-directly mode, keeping it as I upgraded things on the LAN, all of these years. Because otherwise I would have been vulnerable to a third-party in the search path for years, on a machine that clearly and unequivocally, including per direct inspection of the setting in the registry, has this switched off.

* https://jdebp.uk/FGA/web-browser-auto-proxy-configuration.ht...
by samrus | 2025-08-16 09:25:35+00:00
Its a not a target for your company, its a target for capitalism in general.

Every economic systems aims to benefits society in general, and capitalism claims that (to great extent) free market allocation of capital is the best way to do that, using profit (or net increase in capital) as the optimizing function.

Well, when that measure becomes the target, it can get hacked, where profit can be maximised without getting closer to the intended goal. So you can make a very profitable company that just makes society worse. And alot of times that happens when these companies see regulations designed to limit their damage to society as just restrictions on their profitability, rather than understanding that the real goal of their company is to make society better, and profit is just the carrot hanging in front of their individual hamster wheel.
by Sharlin | 2025-08-16 09:27:22+00:00
I doubt either of those is really possible. The worst offenders are countries with little resources for enforcement (at least unless it threatens tourism income). It’s still needed, but at the same time we have to work towards a big reduction in our addiction to expendable, single-use plastic products. Disposal of plastic by burning cannot be a long-term solution, either, as long as almost all of it is made of fossil hydrocarbons.
by graemep | 2025-08-16 09:27:57+00:00
I think "trust the science" is a stupid slogan anyway. Not all science is equally well proven. Who represents the "science" when scientific opinion i divided? Even when there is a consensus there are plenty of examples when a strong consensus has been wrong.

The end result is that i tends to make the public regard science as something that they are told by experts, so then it becomes a matter of which experts they trust. This ultimately undermines trust in science because some expert opinions turn out to be wrong.

We really need better science communication, which will not happen when the media want sensation, politicians want spin, and the public believe either the media or ChatGPT or some random nutcase on Tiktok.
by kbrkbr | 2025-08-16 09:28:22+00:00
Here is another perspective:

> In every technology wave so far, we've disrupted many existing jobs. However we've also opened up new kinds of jobs

That may well be why these technologies were ultimately successful. Think of millions and millions being cast out.

They won't just go away. And they will probably not go down without a fight. "Don't buy AI-made, brother!", "Burn those effing machines!" It's far from unheard of in history.

Also: who will buy if no one has money anymore? What will the state do, when thus tax income goes down, while social welfare and policing costs go up?

There are other scenarios, too: everybody gets most stuff for free, because machines and AI's do most of the work. Working communism for the lower classes, while the super rich stay super rich (like in real existing socialism). I don't think it is a good scenario either. In the long run it will make humanity lazy and dumb.

In any case I think what might happen is not easy to guess, so many variables and nth-order effects. When large systems must seek a new equilibrium all bets are usually off.
by LoganDark | 2025-08-16 09:28:54+00:00
> I still struggle to see how it's used recreationally.

- Adderall keeps you awake. Some people use that to be awake for very long periods of time. Long drives, marathons, etc.

- Adderall can make boring tasks seem engaging, so it can be used, for example, to help a student study. Combining that with no need to sleep that night, can become a bit of an unfair advantage.

- Adderall can cause a high, even though I've only ever experienced that with pure dextroamphetamine. For me it caused everything to feel warm and pleasurable somehow, the first couple weeks I was taking it.

Now I feel nothing except the wakefulness, although when I stop taking it for a while and then start taking it again, sometimes I will spontaneously do every chore that's been building up over the past months in a single day. That's just how it goes for me apparently.
by moffkalast | 2025-08-16 09:29:03+00:00
This was already a problem back then, Nixon was about to introduce UBI in the late 60s and then the admin decided that having people work pointless jobs keeps them better occupied, and the rest of the world followed suit.

There will be new jobs and they will be completely meaningless busywork, people performing nothing of substance while being compensated for it. It's our way of doing UBI and we've been doing it for 50 years already.

Obligatory https://wtfhappenedin1971.com
by impossiblefork | 2025-08-16 09:29:04+00:00
It's that you have the pressure difference for almost free-- you get it without investing anything more than the work required to filter the water, whereas you otherwise have to invest enough to put it under pressure.

Suppose that you've got a pipe to the deep sea and a filtration system at the bottom, then a pump on the surface, so that the pipe is mostly filled with air.

Then you have a sufficient pressure difference for the membrane at the bottom and what goes through the membrane only has to go through the filter system.

Meanwhile if you want to achieve this on the surface, then it has to go through the filter, then through a high-pressure pump. The pressurized water will contain salt and some will go through the membrane, so it will be enriched in salt. So now you have a choice: keep letting it try to get through the membrane, or feed it back through the pressure recovery system and use that to repressurize new water.

Since the pressure exchanger is something like 90% efficient, you don't just feed everything back through the pressure exchanger immediately.

Meanwhile, when the membrane is at the bottom of the sea, you can feed in as much new water as you like.

I had this idea many years ago, but didn't think it was worth pursuing, so it's nice to that it's being tried.
by immibis | 2025-08-16 09:29:34+00:00
Because the code doesn't have any code to clone private keys.

The trust chain ends with you trusting Intel to only make CPUs that do what they say they do, so that if the code doesn't say to clone a private key, it won't.

(You also have to trust the owners to not correlate your traffic from outside the enclave, which is the same as every VPN, so this adds nothing)
by Defletter | 2025-08-16 09:29:38+00:00
Unless something has changed from this (https://github.com/ziglang/zig/issues/1717#issuecomment-1627...), that is unlikely. The irony is that Zig's new async/await strategy is to use event loops with passed-in functions (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3hOiOcbgeA&t=3643s).
by ZYbCRq22HbJ2y7 | 2025-08-16 09:29:52+00:00
Yeah, I mean, an integer can definitely hold more data than a boolean.

If your data was simple enough, you could have an integer hold the entire meaning of a table's row, if every client understood how it was interpreted. You could do bitwise manipulations, encodings, and so on.

Sometimes it is nice to understand what the data means in the schema alone. You can do that with enums, etc.

ate_an_apple_in_may_2024 saw_an_eclipse_before_30

These are more of the sort of things I don't see needing enums, timestamps, integers...
by riedel | 2025-08-16 09:31:13+00:00
The article mentions alternatives to git lfs like git annex that support S3 already (which IMHO is however still a bit of a pain in the ass on windows due to the symlink workflow). Also dvc plays nicely with git and S3. Gitlab btw also simply offloads git lfs to S3. All have their quirks. I typically opt for LFS as a no-brainer but use the others when it fits the workflow and the infrastructure requirements.

Edit: Particularly the hash algorithm and the change detection (also when this happens) makes a difference if you have 2 GB files and not only the 25MB file from the OP
by KronisLV | 2025-08-16 09:31:16+00:00
> And the problems are significant:

> High vendor lock-in – When GitHub wrote Git LFS, the other large file systems—Git Fat, Git Annex, and Git Media—were agnostic about the server-side. But GitHub locked users to their proprietary server implementation and charged folks to use it.

Is this a current issue?

I used Git LFS with a GitLab instance this week, seemed to work fine.

https://docs.gitlab.com/topics/git/lfs/

I also used Git LFS with my Gitea instance a week before that, it was fine too.

https://docs.gitea.com/administration/git-lfs-setup

At the same time it feels odd to hear mentions of LFS being deprecated in the future, while I’ve seldom seen anyone even use it - people just don’t seem to care and shove images and such into regular Git which puzzles me.
by brandonasuncion | 2025-08-16 09:31:33+00:00
I use "random" in quotation marks because it communicates the topic effectively and is very straight to the point. Colloquially, when people say "random" in the context of algorithms, it's generally understood to mean "pseudorandom" or "quasirandom". The trick is essentially an LCG using coprime numbers.

The blog post uses "random" in quotations as well in its title.

I call it O(1) because the ordering is fully determined just by choosing an arbitrary prime number. It's constant time to "reorder" the elements and also constant time to get the i'th element in the permutation. This is in contrast to something like the the Fisher-Yates shuffle which permutes the elements in O(n) time.
by LoganDark | 2025-08-16 09:31:43+00:00
Yep. No matter how long I've been taking my ADHD meds, I can just stop them at any time. I'll sleep for a while (I think my record is 25 hours of sleep), but that's it. No life-threatening withdrawals. No panic. No pain. Safer than any opioid (except perhaps naloxone?).
by withinboredom | 2025-08-16 09:32:27+00:00
I used to work in the fitness industry, and we built apps for some big players (not PureGym, though they were a customer for other parts of our stuff). Anyway, we'd often sit in meetings with them to discuss new features. One time, we discussed adding notifications. They got hung up on this -- there were about 8 different departments -- and they decided to add a notification to ask how clean the gym was... because it was "safe". These people, in general, are terrified of scaring away members by bothering them about anything.

But yeah, we cared deeply about the UX/UI, but these things are built by committee and the committee is pretty dumb, very political, and non-technical.
by inferiorhuman | 2025-08-16 09:32:32+00:00
It's irrlevant that they've had a few issues.

The last Waymo I saw (a couple weeks ago) was stuck trying to make a right turn on to Market St. It was conveniently blocking the pedestrian crosswalk for a few cycles before I went around it. The time before that one got befuddled by a delivery truck and ended up blocking both lanes of 14th Street. Before Cruise imploded they were way worse. I can't say that these self-driving cars have improved much since I moved out of the city a few years back.
by adastra22 | 2025-08-16 09:32:52+00:00
> Adderall keeps you awake

For many (not all) ADHD'ers, amphetamine or caffeine makes them sleepy.

> Adderall can make boring tasks seem engaging

This is true

> so it can be used, for example, to help a student study ... can become a bit of an unfair advantage

Unfair? This isn't sports. Nobody is being cheated by a study-enhancing drug.

> Adderall can cause a high, even though I've only ever experienced that with pure dextroamphetamine. For me it caused everything to feel warm and pleasurable somehow, the first couple weeks I was taking it.

Interesting. FYI ADHD people feel none of that. If anything, the opposite: on stimulants ADHD people feel relaxed and normal, bringing them down from hyperactivity and allowing them to focus on their life.
by motorest | 2025-08-16 09:33:08+00:00
> the economic situation in Europe is much more dire than the US...

Is it, though? The US reports by far the highest levels of lifetime literal homelessness, which is three times greater than in countries like Germany. Homeless people on Europe aren't denied access to free healthcare, primary or even tertiary.

Why do you think the US, in spite of it's GDP, features so low in rankings such as human development index or quality of life?
by JimDabell | 2025-08-16 09:35:01+00:00
I’m pro-AI in general, but I hate the AI writing style that has gotten especially bad lately. It’s down to two things, neither of which are anti-AI sentiment.

Firstly, I find the tone of voice immensely irritating. It sounds like a mixture of LinkedIn broetry, a TEDx talk, and marketing speak. That’s irritating when a human does it, but it’s especially bad when AI applies it in cases where it’s jarringly wrong for the topic at hand.

I recently saw this example:

> This isn’t just “nicer syntax” — it’s a fundamental shift in how your software thinks.

— https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44873145

It was talking about datetime representation in software development but it has the tone of voice of somebody earnestly gesticulating on stage while explaining how they are going to solve world hunger. This is like the uncanny valley except instead of it making me uneasy it just pisses me off.

Secondly, it’s so incredibly overused. You’ll see “it’s not X—it’s Y” three times in three consecutive paragraphs. It’s irritating the first time, so when I see it throughout a whole article, I get an exceptionally low opinion of whoever published it.

Having said that, this article wasn’t particularly bad.
by arghwhat | 2025-08-16 09:36:03+00:00
That's really doesn't apply to water vapor where the natural evaporation is many orders if magnitude grater than what were dealing with, and is a required part of the natural cycle to replenish water reservoirs, with the natural cycle being incredibly short and increased evaporation shortening that cycle.

The issue with greenhouse gasses is their potent impact combined with long lifetime. CO2 has to be slowly absorbed by e.g. plants, and adding more does not speed up the process unlike for water vapor.

You also cannot evaporate past 100% relative humidity, an amount of water saturation that naturally occurs. This is unlike gas emissions, where the sky is the limit.

> BTW we kind of boycott sunlight, it’s called sunscreen

Unless you're applying it to the sun, that's not boycotting sunlight, it's adapting to it. Not to mention that your skin requires sunlight, sunscreen just avoids overexposure.
by tossandthrow | 2025-08-16 09:36:21+00:00
Have you ever build a complex app like this?

In particular, have you have to do testing, security (eg. row level security), manage migrations, change management (eg. for SOC2 or other security frameworks), cache offloads (Redis, and friends), support for microservices, etc.

Comments like this give me a vibe of young developers trying out Supabase for the first time feeling like that approach can scale indefinitely.
by NitpickLawyer | 2025-08-16 09:36:52+00:00
> Not really, there are plenty of things that LLMs cannot do that a professor could make his students do.

Could you offer some examples? I'm having a hard time thinking of what could be at the intersection of "hard enough for SotA LLMs" yet "easy enough for students (who are still learning, not experts in their fields, etc)".
by xg15 | 2025-08-16 09:37:30+00:00
Well, a concrete pain point where I had this problem was Unity scene files (a few years ago). Unity stored not just the assets but also the scene information in binary files, which made integrating that into git an absolute pain. (They made matters worse by also storing "last edit" timestamps in certain files, so git would show changes everywhere even if there weren't any. But that's another topic)

The problem was that the scene information was fundamentally visual (assets arranged in 3D space) so even a diffable text format wouldn't help you much. On the other hand, scenes are large enough that you often would want to work on them in parallel with other people.

I believe their first solution to that was the Asset Server that supported locking. But that still doesn't give two people the ability to work on a scene concurrently.

Eventually, some users went and developed a custom diff/merge tool to solve the problem.

https://discussions.unity.com/t/scene-diff-ease-your-sufferi...