MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by matheusmoreira | 2025-08-22 12:26:06+00:00
It's difficult for me to provide sources because almost everything I've read about these gangs is in portuguese.

English Wikipedia has surprisingly detailed and well referenced articles on these organizations:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primeiro_Comando_da_Capital

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comando_Vermelho

> Individuals that fail to comply with the group's "discipline" are judged by the "crime courts", with sentences that can range from beatings to summary executions.

> Rather than expanding by territorial conquest alone, the PCC is able to develop its illicit activities more efficiently by focusing on the regulation and control of markets combined with a monopoly on violence and discipline.

Pretty much a parallel state.

Just yesterday I was reading about how the drug gangs killed some electricians tasked with shutting off the electricty of a gang member for lack of payment. Another gang launched their own ISP which they forced their subjects to pay for and use, our FCC equivalent ANATEL was trying to disconnect them.

"Undeclared secession" is just my interpretation of the situation. They dominate territories to the point brazilian police cannot freely operate without significant risk of death. Without police, nobody can guarantee brazilian rights and enforce brazilian laws. Without rule of law, is it really brazilian territory? I think not.
by traceroute66 | 2025-08-22 12:26:15+00:00
> People bringing this whole license topic up can't be taken seriously

So you mean all those universities and other places that have been forced to spend $$$ on licenses under the new regime also can't be taken seriously ? Are you saying none of them took advice and had nobody on staff to tell them OpenJDK exists ?

Regarding your Linux comment, some of us are old enough to remember the SCO saga.

Sadly Oracle have deeper pockets to pay more lawyers than SCO ever did ....
by flyinghamster | 2025-08-22 12:26:58+00:00
When my dad's old Sony KV-25XBR bit the dust, he replaced it with a 32" Toshiba flat-screen CRT. That thing was a chunk indeed.

In my opinion, even though it was really quite a good set, you're absolutely right about NTSC looking horrible on big screens. From day one I noticed that the scan lines very much made it look like watching through very fine Venetian blinds.

Upscaling NTSC and putting it on a big flat panel isn't really so great either.
by imiric | 2025-08-22 12:26:59+00:00
That may be true, but navigating 30 years of accumulated cruft, fragmented ecosystems and tooling, and ever-evolving syntax and conventions, is enough to drive anyone away. Personally, I never want to deal with classpath hell again, though this may have improved since I last touched Java ~15 years ago.

Go, with all its faults, tries very hard to shun complexity, which I've found over the years to be the most important quality a language can have. I don't want a language with many features. I want a language with the bare essentials that are robust and well designed, a certain degree of flexibility, and for it to get out of my way. Go does this better than any language I've ever used.
by colejohnson66 | 2025-08-22 12:27:16+00:00
"The Zuck" can't be removed — he has more the 60% of the votes![0] The board stupidly voted to do so a few years ago.

[0]: He only has about 13% of the shares, but the dual allocation means that his class B shares are worth 10 votes. And he owns 99% of those shares. https://observer.com/2023/06/mark-zuckerberg-2023-shareholde...
by api | 2025-08-22 12:27:25+00:00
I call social media the “tobacco companies of the mind.”

There was a time when it was a mixed bag with some bad stuff but some connecting of friends and letting people find new ones. Then the algorithmic timelines and other stuff came. Since then I think it has become a strong net negative.

On balance it’s the worst thing tech has built. Worse, I think, than crypto gambling. It might be worse than the mass surveillance stuff in terms of, as you say, mental destabilization and social harm.
by johncolanduoni | 2025-08-22 12:27:29+00:00
Well, Windows is an odd beast when 8-bit file names are used. If done naively, you can’t express all valid filenames with even broken UTF-8 and non-valid-Unicode filenames cannot be encoded to UTF-8 without loss or some weird convention.

You can do something like WTF-8 (not a misspelling, alas) to make it bidirectional. Rust does this under the hood but doesn’t expose the internal representation.
by j1elo | 2025-08-22 12:27:36+00:00
> People expect a map/filter method

Do they? After too many functional battles I started practicing what I'm jokingly calling "Debugging-Driven Development" and just like TDD keeps the design decisions in mind to allow for testability from the get-go, this makes me write code that will be trivially easy to debug (specially printf-guided debugging and step-by-step execution debugging)

Like, adding a printf in the middle of a for loop, without even needing to understand the logic of the loop. Just make a new line and write a printf. I grew tired of all those tight chains of code that iterate beautifully but later when in a hurry at 3am on a Sunday are hell to decompose and debug.
by snowwrestler | 2025-08-22 12:27:41+00:00
The algorithm on X is intentionally less calibrated for everyone. For example replies are now ordered by subscriber status rather than time stamp or relevance. Subscribers also have preference in “For You” feeds and suggested accounts. There is also an overt thumb on the scale for certain accounts like Elon Musk or the Cat Turd guy.

It’s still an entertaining place to find memes etc, but any use as real signal for public sentiment is long gone.
by indigodaddy | 2025-08-22 12:27:50+00:00
How would you compare gpt-oss-120b to (for coding):

Qwen3-Coder-480B-A35B-Instruct

GLM4.5 Air

Kimi K2

DeepSeek V3 0324 / R1 0528

GPT-5 Mini

Thanks for any feedback!
by rwmj | 2025-08-22 12:28:27+00:00
Only thing? Just off the top of my head: That the LLM doesn't learn incrementally from previous encounters. That we appear to have run out of training data. That we seem to have hit a scaling wall (reflected in the performance of GPT5).

I predict we'll get a few research breakthroughs in the next few years that will make articles like this seem ridiculous.
by mason55 | 2025-08-22 12:28:29+00:00
I think the problem is that in spots where the concepts build on one another, you need to memorize the lower level concepts or else it'll be too hard to make progress on the higher level concepts.

If you're trying to expand polynomials and you constantly have to re-derive multiplication from first principles, you're never going to make any progress on expanding polynomials.
by gf000 | 2025-08-22 12:29:16+00:00
An expert Ruby programmer can do wonders and be insanely productive, but I think there is a size from which it doesn't scale as nicely (both from a performance and a larger team perspective).

PHP's frameworks are fantastic and they hide a lot from an otherwise minefield of a language (though steadily improved over the years).

Both are decent choices if this is what you/your developers know.

But they wouldn't be my personal first choice.
by jstanley | 2025-08-22 12:29:32+00:00
When you say you build "prediction models" - what exactly is that? Is it just a list of possibilities for each word at each position?

So for example forward[the][2] is a list of words that can come 2 places after "the"? Either with duplicates for more likely words, or with probabilities that you can sample, like a Markov model.

Or is the "prediction model" some sort of neural network, or something else?

When you say a word is only chosen if it's probable in both the forward and backward direction, what does that mean?

I still can't see any code in your repo.
by traceroute66 | 2025-08-22 12:29:45+00:00
> you can go `uv run script.py` and it'll automatically fetch the libraries and run the script in a virtual environment.

Yeah, but you still have to install `uv` as a pre-requisite.

And you still end up with a virtual environment full of dependency hell.

And then of course we all remember that whole messy era when Python 2 transitioned to Python 3, and then deferred it, and deferred it again....

You make a fair point, of course it is technically possible to make it (slightly) "cleaner". But I'll still take the Go binary thanks. ;-)
by danaris | 2025-08-22 12:29:47+00:00
> This money was already taxed when the individual who pays the babysitter received it.

And the money the retail clerk gets paid was already taxed when the customers spent it at the store. No, wait, it was already taxed when they got paid it! No, wait, it was already taxed when the customers of their employers spent it! No, wait——

...This whole idea of "money getting taxed multiple times" being a bad thing is absurd. Of course any given dollar going through the economy is going to get taxed many times. It's not about the dollars; it's about the transactions. And, ultimately, it's about funding the government so it can actually provide services, from sanitation all the way up to the military.

(Note that this is not an attempt to say that "the more taxation, the better"; that's obviously absurd, too. There are different levels of taxation that make sense for different people, different countries, different transactions, and different economic circumstances. There is no one simple magic rule you can follow that will always make things better when it comes to taxation, any more than there is with anything else economic or political.)
by justonceokay | 2025-08-22 12:30:07+00:00
Statistical correlations anre important to establish but there are the easiest and least useful part of the research. Creating theories as to “why” and “how” these correlations exist are what advances our knowledge.

I read lot of papers that painstakingly show a correlation in the data, but then their theory about the correlation is a complete non sequitur.
by tux3 | 2025-08-22 12:30:19+00:00
Unfortunately it doesn't have error handling, so when you do += 8 hours and it fails, it won't return a Go error, it won't throw a Go exception, it just silently does the wrong thing (clamp the duration) and hope you don't notice...

It's simplistic and that's nice for small tools or scripts, but at scale it becomes really brittle since none of the edge cases are handled
by sammycage | 2025-08-22 12:30:24+00:00
Thanks for your questions!

1. The documentation for HTML and CSS parsers is pretty straightforward and easier to implement, so I thought it was better to write them myself.

2. It fully supports margin boxes (headers and footers) using properties like @top-left and @bottom-center inside @page rules. You can see more here: https://github.com/plutoprint/plutobook/blob/main/FEATURES.m...

3. Yes, I did come across this. Fragmentation logic is as difficult as it sounds. Right now PlutoBook works with a single, consistent page size throughout a document and does not support named pages, which simplifies things a lot.

Feel free to contact me via email if you have more questions.
by torginus | 2025-08-22 12:30:30+00:00
Yes it does, function-scope defer needs a dynamic data structure to keep track of pending defers, so its not zero cost.

It can be also a source of bugs where you hang onto something for longer than intended - considering there's no indication of something that might block in Go, you can acquire a mutex, defer the release, and be surprised when some function call ends up blocking, and your whole program hangs for a second.
by lucideer | 2025-08-22 12:32:23+00:00
While the thrust of this article is generally correct, I have two issues with it:

1. The words "the only thing" massively underplays the difficulty of this problem. It's not a small thing.

2. One of the issues I've seen with a lot of chat LLMs is their willingness to correct themselves when asked - this might seem, on the surface, to be a positive (allowing a user to steer the AI toward a more accurate or appropriate solution), but in reality it simply plays into users' biases & makes it more likely that the user will accept & approve of incorrect responses from the AI. Often, rather than "correcting" itself it merely "teaches" the AI how to be confidently wrong in an amenable & subtle manner which the individual user finds easy to accept (or more difficult to spot).

If anything, unless/until we can solve the (insurmountable) problem of AI being wrong, AI should at least be trained to be confidently & stubbornly wrong (or right). This would also likely lead to better consistency in testing.
by Zigurd | 2025-08-22 12:32:34+00:00
The weights, so to speak, come from the knowledge base. That means you can't get away from the quality of the knowledge base. That isn't uniform across all domains of knowledge. Then the problem becomes how do you make the training material uniformly high-quality in every knowledge domain? At best it becomes the meta problem of determining the quality of knowledge in some way that makes an LLM able to calibrate confidence to a knowledge domain. But more likely we're stuck with the dubious quality that comes from human bias and wishful thinking in supposedly authoritative material.
by sunrunner | 2025-08-22 12:33:40+00:00
And for a specific example:

In my local neighbourhood there are a couple of commercial spaces that keep seeming to become new businesses, go through the expected few months of rebranding and outfitting, stay for a couple more months, then shut down. Only to become new businesses doing the same thing. Repeat ad nauseum.

Which would be fine, except it’s always the same owners. I’m not sure what the grift is, but I’m sure there’s one. Perhaps its simply taking advantage of business loans. Perhaps something more involved with contractors and business expenses charged differently on paper. I’m not sure, but I’m sure I’m curious.

In the same way that buying a company and taking out business loans for expenses isn’t itself fraudulent, but can be done for that purpose, I can’t help but feel like there’s something going on.
by ajsnigrutin | 2025-08-22 12:33:49+00:00
The problem is always with the extremes.

On one side, you have someone creating a car junkyard in his frontyard with a car tire bonfire behind his house and on the other, you have a random karen neigbor measuring your lawn greenness and soil humidity to see if you're not watering the lawn enough and fine your for that.

Take the power from a few powertrippers and make it more democratic and you solve both issues... turn every issue into a mandatory vote, require some kind of above-majority vote (eg 70%), and you're done. If the issue is so bad, that 70% of your neighbors actually come to a meeting and vote against what you're doing, it must be something really bad.
by krapp | 2025-08-22 12:34:00+00:00
Except no one is offended by "cracker" being in the logo. The outrage (manufactured as it is) is coming from right-wingers over the "nostalgic" elements being removed - despite most of them being far too young to have actually experienced the "old white guys eating crackers out of a barrel in front of the general store" era of Southern Americana - and a lot of them are reaching to call it a "woke" conspiracy of white cultural erasure or some nonsense.

It's a good thing KFC rebranded before social media and antiwoke culture were a thing, I guess.
by bearjaws | 2025-08-22 12:34:10+00:00
There will need to be some sort of carve out for towers, condos, townhomes etc.

I cannot imagine running a building without an HOA, or some form of it. Who pays for the external repairs? Who pays for shared staff?

AC units for a highrise are $2-5M, who is saving for that?

This is just typical lawmaker BS, "oh I am going to do away with it", no real plan.

If anything just remove the HOA bylaws that are clearly violating peoples rights, like not being able to have cars in your drive way or only display flags certain ways.
by sfmz | 2025-08-22 12:34:25+00:00
Here's my list of things making it worse: cities designed for cars, no third spaces, poorly designed public space, hostile architecture, no social safety net, replacing social relationships with parasocial relationships, filling every moment of idle time with glacing at your phone, smaller families/smaller extended families, low access to nature, needing a second job (or low free time), too much screentime.
by newpavlov | 2025-08-22 12:34:32+00:00
>which we found in every existing futures implementation we inspected

This is exactly what I meant when I wrote about the indirect influence from other languages. People may dress it up as much as they want, but it's clear that polling was the most important model at the time (outside of the Windows world) and a lot of design consideration was put into being compatible with it. The Rust async model literally uses the polling terminology in its most fundamental interfaces!

>this approach nevertheless forces allocation at almost every point of future composition

This is only true in the narrow world of modeling async execution with futures. Do you see heap allocations in Go on each equivalent of "future composition" (i.e. every function call)? No, you do not. With the stackfull models you allocate a full stack for your task and you model function calls as plain function calls without any future composition shenaniganry.

Yes, the stackless model is more efficient memory-wise and allows for some additional useful tricks (like sharing future stacks in `join!`). But the stackfull model is perfectly efficient for 95+% of use cases, fits better with the borrow/ownership model, does not result in the `.await` noise, does not lead to the horrible ecosystem split (including split between different executors), and does not need the language-breaking hacks like `Pin` (see the `noalias` exception made for it). And I believe it's possible to close the memory efficiency gap between the models with certain compiler improvements (tracking maximum stack usage bound for functions and introducing a separate async ABI with two separate stacks).

>The existence of a usable io_uring in 2016 wouldn't have changed the fundamental calculus.

IIRC the first usable versions of io-uring very released approximately during the time when the Rust async was undergoing stabilization. I am really confident that if the async system was designed today we would've had a totally different model. Importance of completion-based models has only grown since then not only because of the sane async file IO, but also because of Spectre and Meltdown.
by xlii | 2025-08-22 12:34:42+00:00
After spending some time in lower level languages Go IMO makes much more sense. Your example:

First one - you have an address to a struct, you pass it, all good.

Second case: you set address of struct to "nil". What is nil? It's an address like anything else. Maybe it's 0x000000 or something else. At this point from memory perspective it exists, but OS will prevent you from touching anything that NULL pointer allows you to touch.

Because you don't touch ANYTHING nothing fails. It's like a deadly poison in a box you don't open.

Third example id the same as second one. You have a IMessage but it points to NULL (instead NULL pointing to deadly poison).

And in fourth, you finally open the box.

Is it magic knowledge? I don't think so, but I'm also not surprised about how you can modify data through slice passing.

IMO the biggest Go shortcoming is selling itself as a high level language, while it touches more bare metal that people are used to touch.
by flohofwoe | 2025-08-22 12:34:45+00:00
> "let wohnt_bei_Böckler_STRAẞE"

This string cannot be encoded as ASCII in the first place.

> But if you allow full 8-bit bytes, please don't restrict them to UTF-8

UTF-8 has no 8-bit restrictions... You can encode any 21-bit UNICODE codepoint with UTF-8.

It sound's like you're confusing ASCII, Extended ASCII and UTF-8:

- ASCII: 7-bits per "character" (e.g. not able to encode international characters like äöü) but maps to the lower 7-bits of the 21-bits of UNICODE codepoints (e.g. all ASCII character codes are also valid UNICODE code points)

- Extended ASCII: 8-bits per "character" but the interpretation of the upper 128 values depends on a country-specific codepage (e.g. the intepretation of a byte value in the range between 128 and 255 is different between countries and this is what causes all the mess that's usually associated with "ASCII". But ASCII did nothing wrong - the problem is Extended ASCII - this allows to 'encode' äöü with the German codepage but then shows different characters when displayed with a non-German codepage)

- UTF-8: a variable-width encoding for the full range of UNICODE codepoints, uses 1..4 bytes to encode one 21-bit UNICODE codepoint, and the 1-byte encodings are identical with 7-bit ASCII (e.g. when the MSB of a byte in an UTF-8 string is not set, you can be sure that it is a character/codepoint in the ASCII range).

Out of those three, only Extended ASCII with codepages are 'deprecated' and should no longer be used, while ASCII and UTF-8 are both fine since any valid ASCII encoded string is indistinguishable from that same string encoded as UTF-8, e.g. ASCII has been 'retconned' into UTF-8.
by kqr | 2025-08-22 12:34:51+00:00
To add nuance, it is not that bad. Given reasonable levels of statistical power, experiments cannot show meaningless effect sizes with statistical significance. Of course, some people design experiments at power levels way beyond what's useful, and this is perhaps even more true when it comes to things where big data is available (like website analytics), but I would argue the problem is the unreasonable power level, rather than a problem with statistical significance itself.

When wielded correctly, statistical significance is a useful guide both to what's a real signal worth further investigation, and it filters out meaningless effect sizes.

A bigger problem even when statistical significance is used right is publication bias. If, out of 100 experiments, we only get to see the 7 that were significant, we already have a false:true ratio of 5:2 in the results we see – even though all are presented as true.
by roxolotl | 2025-08-22 12:34:59+00:00
The big thing here is that they can’t even be confident. There is no there there. They are a, admittedly very useful, statistical model. Ascribing confidence to it is an anthropomorphizing mistake which is easy to make since we’re wired to trust text that feels human.

They are at their most useful when it is cheaper to verify their output than it is to generate it yourself. That’s why code is rather ok; you can run it. But once validation becomes more expensive than doing it yourself, be it code or otherwise, their usefulness drops off significantly.
by snowwrestler | 2025-08-22 12:35:19+00:00
It is often not a rational decision. People spend time on social media because they find it interesting or entertaining. That doesn’t mean it is actually useful or good for them. That includes journalists.

High-profile brands are somewhat stuck because departing would cause a negative news cycle. Quite a few have shrunk their organic social media teams and put more resources into paid social media, which has a more directly measurable ROI.
by gf000 | 2025-08-22 12:35:34+00:00
I have made a bunch of claims, that are objectively true. From there, basic logical inference says that you can completely freely use Java. Anything else is irrelevant.

I don't know what/which university you talk about, but I'm sure they were also "forced to pay $$$" for their water bills and whatnot. If they decided to go with paid support, then.. you have to pay for it. In exchange you can a) point your finger at a third-party if something goes wrong (which governments love doing/often legally necessary) b) get actual live support on Christmas Eve if needed.