MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by tomku | 2025-08-28 19:52:45+00:00
It has never been anywhere close to certain, we just had 20 years of wild, unsustainable growth that encouraged people to cover their eyes and pretend the ride would go on forever. 20 years of telling everyone under the age of 30 that of course they should learn to code and that CS was the new medical or legal degree. 20 years of smugly acting like we are the inevitable future when we are, in fact, subject to the same ups and downs as every other career.
by 7thpixel | 2025-08-28 19:53:16+00:00
Since you are asking for feedback, I ran your site through my algo and here are some of the highlights:

What's Unclear:

The exact target audience, detailed integrations available, and business model specifics remain unclear.

Risky Assumptions:

- Non-coders (beginners) want a no-code solution to build AI-powered applications

- Customers are willing to pay for no-code AI application building (subscription or per app)

- Integrations with third-party APIs/services can scale without major technical hurdles

Do any of these resonate?
by griffzhowl | 2025-08-28 19:53:20+00:00
> It shows.

Why be so extravagantly supercilious on the internet?

It's ironic because it seems you're not that familiar with general relativity, and confuse the entire region within the event horizon with the singularity.

Black holes have a causally connected region within the event horizon which is distinct from the singularity, so there can in fact be observers within the event horizon that are in communication with each other, and they can have a perspective, i.e. receive information. The simplest black hole model would be the Schwarzschild black hole (a static, spherically symmetric spacetime, which is empty apart from the central mass) with the Kruskal-Szekeres coordinates, which smoothly continue over the event horizon.

Here's a nice discussion by John Baez about what you might see as you cross the event horizon: https://johncarlosbaez.wordpress.com/2024/11/30/black-hole-p...

To some extent though, what really happens within the event horizon remains speculative, because we can't directly verify any of these predictions about what happens there without actually crossing the horizon ("What happens within the event horizon, stays within the event horizon"). We just make inferences based on the structure of our currently most predictive theory for gravitational phenomena outside event horizons (which is general relativity, ofc)
by eatsyourtacos | 2025-08-28 19:53:35+00:00
China works as a society to truly try to help their people. They invest in their country and people. That is why they are prospering. It's not just "catching up".

The US for example doesn't take care of it's people. They do the absolute bare minimum in the name of illusionary "freedom". The only people who are free are the rich.

Call it whatever you want.. but there is great benefit in having a government who recognizes that society comes first- not the individual.
by crawshaw | 2025-08-28 19:53:36+00:00
A bubble is asset prices systematically diverging from reasonable expectations of future cash flows. Bubbles are driven by financial speculation.

The claim in the blog post that all technology leads to speculative asset bubbles I find hard to believe. Where was the electricity bubble? The steel bubble? The pre-war aviation bubble? (The aviation bubble appeared decades later due to changes in government regulation.)

Is this an AI bubble? I genuinely don't know! There is a lot of real uncertainty about future cash flows. Uncertainty is not the foundation of a bubble.

I knew dot-com was a bubble because you could find evidence, even before it popped. (A famous case: a company held equity in a bubble asset, and that company had a market cap below the equity it held, because the bubble did not extend to second-order investments.)
by qzw | 2025-08-28 19:54:08+00:00
Western Capitalists didn’t and don’t give two shits about a liberal China. The investments were made and technologies transferred because the Chinese government required them in order for Western companies to access China’s enormous pool of stable and cheap labor. As for this being the Chinese century, I think it’s not an inevitability. Japan at one point also looked like it had a shot of becoming a dominant economic superpower.
by mopsi | 2025-08-28 19:54:35+00:00
> Sure Russia has absolutely shit the bed in the beginning of this conflict but now they're being carried by China's massive economy and they're slowly but surely winning this conflict

By what measure? All the declared objectives - "denazification" (the destruction of Ukraine's sovereignty), "demilitarization" (the destruction of Ukraine's armed forces), "protection of ethnic Russians" (now dying under Russian missile attacks), and so on - have obviously failed. The frontline has been static for years, while Russian losses are at record highs. Despite hundreds of thousands of dead and nearly a million wounded since 2022, Russia has not managed to capture even a single one of Ukraine's 22 regional capitals. Is this how victory is supposed to look like?
by jfengel | 2025-08-28 19:54:49+00:00
The reals aren't algebraically under multiplication; a simple equation like x*x=1 can't be handled in real numbers. The complex numbers are algebraically closed. So I suspect that God created the complex numbers.

God certainly had a fondness for the real subset. Measurements are real scalars -- so much so that it really does look like God created the reals. That's what's important to us. But the fundamental laws seem to require the complex numbers (or their equivalent, like matrices), and closure under arithmetic operations really does feel like it should be a requirement for the reality of the universe.
by bluecoconut | 2025-08-28 19:55:00+00:00
After maintaining my own agents library for a while, I’ve switched over to pydantic ai recently. I have some minor nits, but overall it's been working great for me. I’ve especially liked combining it with langfuse.

Towards coding agents, I wonder if there are any good / efficient ways to measure how much different implementations work on coding? SWE-bench seems good, but expensive to run. Effectively I’m curious for things like: given tool definition X vs Y (eg. diff vs full file edit), prompt for tool X vs Y (how it’s described, does it use examples), model choice (eg. MCP with Claude, but python-exec inline with GPT-5), sub-agents, todo lists, etc. how much across each ablation, does it matter? And measure not just success, but cost to success too (efficiency).

Overall, it seems like in the phase space of options, everything “kinda works” but I’m very curious if there are any major lifts, big gotchas, etc.

I ask, because it feels like the Claude code cli always does a little bit better, subjectively for me, but I haven’t seen a LLMarena or clear A vs B, comparison or measure.
by trextrex | 2025-08-28 19:55:02+00:00
I don't understand this single dimensional view of the world where one country has to be the "winner" or "best". Historically that has almost never been the case except for military might, which wasn't necessarily correlated with technological advancement. Economic size does matter, but that's eventually going to track population size. Why can't we have a multi polar world where different countries are good at different things, and no one has to dominate?
by ryzvonusef | 2025-08-28 19:55:11+00:00
I live in Pakistan and two years back we had this exact same problem, (election interference) and frankly, you just try to scrape through solutions, but without an answerable government, there is little you can do.

We tried things like Proton VPN and Windscribe VPN, as well as enabling MT proxy on Telegram, but soon govts find it easier to just mass ban internet access.

Use Netblocks.org to analyse the level of internet blockage and try to react accordingly.
by vineyardmike | 2025-08-28 19:55:19+00:00
> And now, the Orange Clown is finishing "the job" by laying waste to US aliances and institutions, making sure 21st is irrevocably the Chinese Century.

I’m going to concur with others here. It’s not irrecoverable. And the future isn’t yet written.

China has had the fortune (even eclipsing the US) of being a giant market of burgeoning consumers and massive amount of labor. The US first won this economic opportunity partially through immigration and a well-timed WW2 victory. Now its chinas turn to wield consumerism.

That said, China also has the misfortune of a serious risk for population collapse due, in part, to the prior 1 child policy. They’re aging faster than the US and others nations, and that will dramatically shift their economic output, consumption, and of course strain government resources. They also don’t have a culture of immigration like the US to slow the change. It would take a major global shift to see large immigration into China. There are other major economic risks they face, like their real estate debt, but the population collapse does pose a significant threat to stunt or reverse their ascendance.

TLDR: China could be the next Japan, not the next US.
by schlarpc | 2025-08-28 19:55:29+00:00
Interesting that it can’t reestablish the connection, as the application level protocol should support it just fine. The client should notice the GRE (game rules engine) TCP socket is broken, and reset everything. When you reconnect, the front door service should notify you to a GRE session still in progress, and the client should be able to rejoin that. At least, that’s how it works on desktop.
by ares623 | 2025-08-28 19:56:09+00:00
> Other forms of engineering have to take into account the variability of the world.

> Maybe LLMs mark the point where we join our engineering peers in a world on non-determinism.

Those other forms of engineering have no choice due to the nature of what they are engineering.

Software engineers already have a way to introduce determinism into the systems they build! We’re going backwards!
by mvieira38 | 2025-08-28 19:56:12+00:00
(slightly off-topic)

Students shouldn't ever have become so laser-focused on a single career path anyway, and even worse than that is how colleges have become glorified trade schools in our minds. Students should focus on studying for their classes, getting their electives and extracurriculars in, getting into clubs... Then depending on which circles they end up in, they shape their career that way. The thought that getting a Computer Science major would guarantee students a spot in the tech industry was always ridiculous, because the industry was just never structured that way, it's always been hacker groups, study groups, open source, etc. bringing out the best minds
by roscas | 2025-08-28 19:56:36+00:00
Perfect. Google Sheets works on Chrome browsers so you can install Chrome.

MS Notepad and PaintBrush do not exist on Linux. Alternatives are GIMP, Krita or Paintbrush.

Since Notepad is very simple, you have Mousepad, Gedit and many more. I would install also LibreOffice and use Writer. Also take a look at Calc that is like Sheets.

Linux has everything you need.
by 7thpixel | 2025-08-28 19:56:42+00:00
I ran your page through my algo to see what was unclear/risky:

What's unclear: Specific pricing plans and the exact nature of the deployment process.

Risky Assumptions:

Customers find global edge performance optimization highly desirable.

SMBs and enterprises will find enough value to subscribe to tiered pricing plans.

The intelligent codebase understanding works with large, complex projects.

You may already be testing or have evidence on these, but it wasn't clear from analyzing your page.
by m0llusk | 2025-08-28 19:57:00+00:00
The high speed rail comparison is a good example of how this view is as flawed as the idea that China makes cheap crap. China spent around a trillion dollars worth of conjured financial assets on their high speed rail network. The result has some very positive qualities but also ongoing cost overruns, many incidents including quite a few deaths, and spotty service on routes that turned out to have inconsistent demand. Now the bills are coming due, revenues are way down, the country is in a large downturn, and the future is cloudy. We will see how things play out, but the idea that China has a great rail network only really stands if you ignore all the issues with debt, maintenance, and disappointing utilization.
by th0ma5 | 2025-08-28 19:57:44+00:00
To me, it is more specific to say that many futurists don't take into account the social and economic network effects of changes taking place. Many just act as if the future will continue on completely unchallenged in this current state. But if you look at someone like Kurzweil, you can see the very narrow and specific focus of a prediction, which has proved to be more informative to me as a high bar of futurism.
by _verandaguy | 2025-08-28 19:57:57+00:00
That's an interesting idea, and probably something you might be able to achieve with a tool like h26forge.

It's also probably more useful to just have a connection be fully dedicated to a VPN, and have the traffic volume over time mimic what you'd see in a video, rather than embedding it in a video -- thanks to letsencrypt, much of the web's served over TLS these days (asterisks for countries like KZ and TM which force the use of a state-sponsored CA), so going to great lengths to embed your VPN in a video isn't really practical.
by netsharc | 2025-08-28 19:58:22+00:00
I went to China in 2019, and they scanned my iris... yeah...

At an airport, there was a sign that said "Stand in front of the camera and we'll tell you the way to your gate.". It scanned my face, and on the screen it showed me my name (I guess to make sure it's the correct person), my gate, and how to walk there. I never consented to this commercial use...
by platevoltage | 2025-08-28 19:58:27+00:00
I don't see any scenario where the rest of us would receive any benefits from this. I would imagine that mechanics in the military have access to everything they need to keep their Humvees running (I'm sure they're called something else now, I don't care). That doesn't mean that the software to fix a 2026 Mercedes won't cost thousands of dollars, if it's even available by a non-dealer at all.

The military can demand this, we can't.
by jkaplowitz | 2025-08-28 19:58:37+00:00
Tailscale + Mullvad does have a privacy advantage over either one by itself: the party that could potentially spy on the VPN traffic (Mullvad) doesn’t know whose traffic it is beyond that it’s a Tailscale customer. Any government who wanted to trace specific traffic back to OP would need to get the cooperation of both Mullvad and Tailscale, which is a lot less likely than even the quite unlikely event of getting Mullvad to cooperate.
by JeffJor | 2025-08-28 19:58:59+00:00
Q1: "A family has two children. You're told that at least one of them is a girl. What's the probability both are girls?"

Q2: "A family has two children. You're told that at least one of them is a boy. What's the probability both are boys?"

Note that these are symmetric problems, and must have the same answer.

Q3: "A family has two children. You're told that a gender, that applies to at least one, is written inside a sealed envelope. What's the probability both have that gender?"

In Q3, we have no information. So the answer is the proportion of two-child families that are single gendered. That is, 1/2.

But if we open the envelope, and read what is written inside, the problem becomes either Q1 or Q2. Which have the same answer. So we don't have to open it; whatever the answer to Q1 and Q2 is, opening the envelope in Q3 make its answer the same. If that answer is 1/3, we have a paradox. The answer has to be 1/2 of we don't look.

This is what is known as "Bertrand's Box Paradox." Well, if we add a fourth box to his problem, with one gold and one silver coin. I realize that in modern times the problem itself is called the paradox, but what Bertrand actually wrote (edited to this problem) was "How can it be that opening the envelope suffices to change the probability from 1/2 to 1/3?"

The resolution is that probability must be based on the full set of possibilities, not the possibilities that _could_ result from the full set of _states._ These are the possibilities for this problem:

1) BB and you are told that there is at least one boy. 2A) BG and you are told that there is at least one boy. 2B) BG and you are told that there is at least one girl. 3A) GB and you are told that there is at least one boy. 3B) GB and you are told that there is at least one girl. 4) GG and you are told that there is at least one girl.

Each numbered case has a prior probability of 1/4. Let's say the "A" subcases have a probability of Q/4, so the "B" subcases have a probability of (1-Q)/4.

The answer to the first problem is the probability of case 1, which is 1/4, divided by the total probability of cases 1, 2A, which is (1+2Q)/4. That's 1/(1+2Q).

The answer to the second problem is the probability of case 4, divided by the total probability of cases 4, 2B, and 3B. Which is (3-2Q)/4.

Bertrand's paradox, stated another way, is that these must be equal, but can only be equal if Q=1/2 and both answers are 1/2.
by gausswho | 2025-08-28 19:59:04+00:00
Reminds me of the heuristic some folks use around COVID vaccines. Dismiss their success in saving millions of lives... because they succeeded.

It's not a hotel it's a reservation. Where habitat destruction can move slowly enough that they fade from sufficient attention to obstruct profits.

The symbolic animal of America, the bald eagle, has its reservation, until we think of it as a cartoon of the past alongside Mickey Mouse.
by ottah | 2025-08-28 19:59:18+00:00
Not everything that's authored and published is eligible for copyright. Copyright applies to only the creative elements of a work that are unique. Things that are facts, or are necessary for function are not copyrightable.

They likely hold a copyright on the exact expression of their documentation, but the facts and information in that documentation, and necessary configuration such as port numbers, and dependency selection are not subject to copyright.
by WorldMaker | 2025-08-28 19:59:33+00:00
Maybe, yeah.

Relegations would also mean more opportunities for teams to be fan-owned. It's reasonably common in relegation/promotion leagues, especially after major upsetting relegations (though "Welcome to Wrexham" is an interesting story of the reverse, a fan-owned team selling to new money for the hopes of resources for promotion). In the US, we mostly just have the Packers as a fan-owned team, and that situation is truly an exception and almost impossible to replicate.

It does feel strange that so many US "major" teams need a billionaire or two or three to run. Why aren't more of the teams themselves public companies? Why are they all as much private toys for the super-rich as anything else? We've already seen that shows up as a lack of concern for/nonalignment with local/regional/fan interests on long enough timescales (all the "team moves", for instance).
by dionian | 2025-08-28 19:59:52+00:00
> I’ve often heard, with decent reason, an LLM compared to a junior colleague. But I find LLMs are quite happy to say “all tests green”, yet when I run them, there are failures. If that was a junior engineer’s behavior, how long would it be before H.R. was involved?

A junior engineer can't write code anywhere nearly as fast. It's apples vs oranges. I can have the LLm rewrite the code 10 times until its correct and its much cheaper than hiring an obsequious jr engineer
by jacquesm | 2025-08-28 20:00:01+00:00
You mean like a Londoner retiring in the countryside? I really don't see the difference. Local is such a crazy concept, I mean, I totally get what you're getting at but you are using the wrong tools to arrive at the wrong conclusion.

A middle-class Brit who buys a home in Spain to retire in just got sold a property that was worth peanuts on the market not that long ago for a very large amount of money in the Spanish economy. Whoever sold it to them would have never sold it for the same amount of money to another person from the same location because we've embraced 'the market'. What you fail to touch on is that this Briton is importing not only their wealth, but also a lot of extra expenditure all of which benefits the local economy. The real burden is when they start leaning on the health care system, which wasn't made to cater to a bunch of aging foreigners and that will quickly turn the so-far net positive into a net negative, financially and service wise for everybody else.

Emigrating later in life to another - poorer - country is a burden on that poorer country that the immigrants did not pay into earlier in life. If you emigrate: do it when you're young enough to contribute to the system that you will rely on to support you when you're older. Otherwise you are just preying on the denizens of weaker economies (ok, they got the better deal with the weather). The housing market could be fixed, the economic disparity and subsequent service shortages can not, that money got left behind in the UK.
by jolmg | 2025-08-28 20:00:04+00:00
It's just big enough that it might be barely usable to touch type with sufficient practice, not comfortably though. Definitely seems smaller than the Libretto from glancing at pictures. If the idea is to have a portable keyboard to then sit down somewhere and work, there are pocket BT ones that fold in half and are comfortably big.

The only use-case I can think for the Pinephone keyboard is if for some reason you want a physical keyboard to use while walking.
by mixmastamyk | 2025-08-28 20:00:16+00:00
Yes, though haven't used it as a convertible yet. I usually use tablets as my home movie machine since we don't have a proper TV. At this, the Starlite with Phosh and recent Fedora/firmware updates is fantastic. Freetube, Netflix and Kanopy on Firefox via widevine, PBS, and homegrown .mkv's are more than I have time to watch.

On the go a Framework 13 is fantastic, tall screen, light and powerful. Only waiting on coreboot and ECC RAM.
by incr_me | 2025-08-28 20:00:21+00:00
> China, like Russia, started from an incredibly low baseline - largely caused by authoritarian power. A new authoritarian power revitalized the economy and genuinely improved people's lives. People are generally grateful, and they have reason to be.

Besides the ideological component here being embarrassingly incoherent (the bad was caused by "authoritarian power" in general; the good was caused by "a new authoritarian power" in particular) your facts are plain wrong. The low baseline was pre-Mao (and pre-Lenin) when famine, illiteracy, technological impoverishment, and labor immobility was the rule. Deng's opening up certainly was something, but it undoubtedly stood upon the shoulders of the Mao era. Even the WEF agrees: https://www.weforum.org/stories/2025/06/how-china-got-rich-4...

> But the “conventional wisdom” ignores the fact that — even inclusive of the serious mistakes, lost lives and lost years that some insist define the early decades after 1949 — the foundations laid during Mao’s rule, including land reform and redistribution, substantial investments in heavy industry, public health, literacy, electrification, and transportation gave China a substantial leg up. These developments positioned China for takeoff well ahead of the official inauguration of Reform and Opening in 1978. While Deng’s reforms catalyzed China’s economic takeoff, they built upon critical foundations established during Mao’s era, which are often overlooked.

Even the WEF is wrong, of course, because they do the usual thing of inflating the importance of GDP; GDP has virtually no applicability to a socialist economy and the "revitalization" you speak of was, as far as its quantitative measure, a magic trick. A literal capitalization upon decades of labor mobilization.