MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by gck1 | 2025-08-27 05:22:36+00:00
I'm in the same boat as OP. Used GrapheneOS until Google Pay was enabled in my country. ALL banks then killed their proprietary NFC wallet apps in a month and told users to use Google Pay. I switched to using a Garmin watch for a while.

Then bank apps themselves started giving me warnings that my device was insecure (the irony) and I got increasingly frequent KYC questionnaires coming my way. One of the banks also disabled access to some money transfer services, which I suspect is because of some flag on my account in their system.

I had to ditch GrapheneOS at that point. There are simply no banks that I can switch to.
by rc00 | 2025-08-27 05:22:50+00:00
I would hope not. That would mean that no other vendor has shipped working ARM hardware support for Linux or has upstream support in the kernel. Forget the hostile nature Apple has proven to possess when consumers dare treat their hardware as if paying for it makes it their own.

Qualcomm has been beating the marketing drum on this instead of delivering. Ampere has delivered excellent hardware but does not seem interested in the desktop segment. The "greatest Linux laptop around" can not be some unmaintained relic from a hostile hardware company.
by WalterBright | 2025-08-27 05:23:37+00:00
> in the right place at the right time in possession significant capital as genius

1. he created the capital he had

2. he is not the only person with capital

3. the opportunities he saw, no one else did

When someone wins the lottery 3 times in a row, it is no longer credible to call it "luck". He's simply a genius.
by inejge | 2025-08-27 05:24:50+00:00
> With enough automation the crew [of a generation ship] could be quite small.

Other than the engineering challenges, we don't have the faintest idea how a really long-term crew is going to work socially and psychologically in a constrained, isolated, artificial environment.

The closest analog are the naval/polar expeditions, which were unisex and under military or hierarchical command, none of them longer than a couple of years. Some perished (Franklin), some pivoted (Shackleton w/Endurance), some failed with loss of life (Scott), some worked (Amundsen). But all had options unavailable to a ship in vacuum, and were on an incomparably shorter timescale.
by rendaw | 2025-08-27 05:27:08+00:00
I think "well just make the PR yourself" comments are too reductionist myself, but in this case Framework does have space for 3rd party components in the marketplace. I don't think it'd be crazy to imagine some custom keyboards will appear there.

And here's an example of someone making a custom keyboard: https://blog.perprogramming.com/posts/framework-ortholinear-... - it looks pretty awesome, and I'm fairly sure this is the first time I've ever seen a laptop with an ergo keyboard like that.

Framework 16 is a collection of modules, so I think complaining about the modules is fair game, but it could also be seen as a basis/standard that isn't expected to fit everyone's needs, but fit maybe 90% and allow other people to make the customizations they need easier, in which case complaining about they arrow keys on a single component does feel a bit trivial.
by rerdavies | 2025-08-27 05:28:01+00:00
> Do ARM software need optimization more than x86?

If Windows-World software developers could one day announce that they will only support Intel Gen 14 or later (and not bother with AMD at all), and only support the latest and greatest NVidia GPUs (and only GPUs that cost $900 or more), I'm pretty sure they would optimize their code differently, and would sometimes get dramatic performance improvements.

It's not so much that ARM needs optimizations more, but that x86 software can't practically be broadly optimized.
by Pedro_Ribeiro | 2025-08-27 05:28:13+00:00
Mhm but I don't believe inherently violent and dangerous things like guns and cigarretes are comparable to simple technology.

Should the creators of Tornado Cash be in prison for what they have enabled? You can jail them but the world can't go back, just like it can't go back when a new OSS model is released.

It is also much easier to crack down on illegal gun distribution than to figure out who uploaded the new model torrent or who deployed the latest zk innovation on Ethereum.

I don't think your hypothetical law will have the effects you think it will.

---

I also referenced this in another reply but I believe the government controlling what can go on a publicly distributed AI model is a dangerous path and probably inconstitucional.
by goosejuice | 2025-08-27 05:28:27+00:00
So a person who most of us strongly despise makes you throw out all rational thought and make false equivalence arguments about these autonomous systems?

Everything doesn't have to be about Elon. Imagine you replaced him in 2015, but still approached autonomy through mass market level 2. How would you compare them? I think you might add just a few caveats about the constraints and environments they operate in.
by np1810 | 2025-08-27 05:29:53+00:00
> Anyone know the best way to get the SpaceX video from Twitter/X onto Apple TV?

I don't have Apple TV but for videos on X, I download it temporarily to a intermediate server then stream using VLC [1] it's a hassle but I get great watching experience on all platforms. For now, you can stream this on VLC: https://bin.hrzn.pics/0AdLye8

Though I generally watch Everyday Astronaut's [2] coverage on YouTube.

[1] https://apps.apple.com/us/app/vlc-media-player/id650377962

[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BtUMt0gsqrs
by unsignedint | 2025-08-27 05:30:48+00:00
Even if I don't run my own mail server, I can still open an email header and see context. Last time I checked, I can't walk into a telco and ask for the telephone equivalent of that. On PSTN, there's nothing beyond a bare caller ID string, and that lack of context is exactly why I see it as a problem.

Email gives end users multiple signals and filters to work with. PSTN doesn't, and that's why I disagree with your equivalence.
by jameslk | 2025-08-27 05:30:53+00:00
> The New York Times has sued OpenAI and Microsoft, accusing them of illegal use of copyrighted work to train their chatbots. The companies have denied those claims.

I mean, OpenAI doesn’t look good here and seems they deserve more scrutiny in the realm of mental health, but the optics for the NYT writing up this piece doesn’t either. It comes off to me as using a teenager’s suicide for their corporate agenda against OpenAI

Seems like a different rigorous journalistic source where this isn’t such a conflict of interest would be better to read
by orbital-decay | 2025-08-27 05:31:31+00:00
As much as I dislike (current) Musk, the comment I'm responding to clearly wasn't about that. Do you see this work being done by anyone else? I don't. And yes, it has the potential to turn dystopian, sure. Don't let it. I don't know how some people manage to see everything as strictly black and white.

Being called a bot was unexpected, to put it mildly.
by defrost | 2025-08-27 05:32:04+00:00
I'm good - I enjoy a rambling conversation nominally centred about <something>

Mother lode comes from mining, the real or imagined source of tiny nuggets found washed further downstream (by current or ancient no longer present water flows). In that sense, to which I'm a little wedded by practice, they don't move about, at least not until mined dry and relocated to some treasury or rich persons pocket.

Bangs and matrix are overloaded, it's hard keeping up with what others mean in their use of terms, Gammon in the UK has a meaning different to it's use by urban aboriginal people in Australia.

For some the origins of local Black Culture have little remnant of African culture and predate both the arrival of convict ships upon the tide and the retreat of ice from Europe that allowed the settlement of the extremely white bits.

Great party hats though: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gwion_Gwion_rock_paintings

* https://www.magabala.com/products/yorro-yorro

RIP Kumanjayi Mowaljarlai - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gw-AgvUEVm4
by userbinator | 2025-08-27 05:33:58+00:00
No, it makes as much sense as USB-NVMe, which does exist, and as the article mentions, so does the other direction (a PCIe SATA controller in the shape of an M.2 SSD) but there's just not enough of a market for NVMe-SATA yet. They're just block device protocols, and the conversion between them is well-defined.

A bidirectional example is IDE/SATA, for which plentiful cheap adapters in both directions (one IC automatically detects its role) exist; IDE host to SATA device, or SATA host to IDE device.

For another "directional" example, it's worth noting that SATA to MMC/(micro/mini)SD(HC/XC)/TF adapters exist which let you use those cards (often multiple, even in RAID!) as a SATA drive, but the opposite direction, exposing a SATA drive as an SD card, does not (yet).
by 0xDEAFBEAD | 2025-08-27 05:34:21+00:00
Don't forget France.

The far-right party is most popular by far: https://www.politico.eu/europe-poll-of-polls/france/

The majority of second-round polling has the far right winning the next presidency in France, potentially even by a landslide: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2027_F...

For that reason, it's rather ironic to me when I see Europeans rally around Macron. France is poised to rug-pull Europe. Sorry guys.

BTW, guess which party is most popular in the UK? It's not particularly close: https://www.politico.eu/europe-poll-of-polls/united-kingdom/

At least AfD is merely a very close #2 in Germany: https://www.politico.eu/europe-poll-of-polls/germany/

Europe is sleepwalking.
by brandon_pampuch | 2025-08-27 05:34:31+00:00
I'm guessing this is sarcasm. I am not here to talk politics either. Just a way to help startups grow. MENA countries (Palestine included) are near the third largest tech hub in the world. They have worked in YC startups and are insanely talented. I have had them beat out FAANG engineers for roles in the United States.
by WalterBright | 2025-08-27 05:34:41+00:00
I have lots of ideas. Some are great, some are ordinary, and some turn out to be embarrassingly stupid.

So does everyone else who tries to create new things. Edison had dumb ideas, too, like his mining ideas. The Wrights also had dumb ideas like their persistence with wing warping, and the canard stabilizer.

The sub thing didn't hurt anyone, it was an emergency so he didn't have much time to think about it, so really it's uncharitable to slam him for trying to help.

Do you think his rockets are dumb ideas, too? Starlink? Tesla?
by skotobaza | 2025-08-27 05:35:27+00:00
I always thought of Go as a middle ground between C and Python. From C it gets simple syntax, from Python - "batteries included" part.

Deserializing JSON and XML is a breeze from my experience. And it's available out of the box. But I guess C++ will get there with reflection having been approved in C++26.

So I don't think it will go away (in the coming years at least), since a lot of tools is written in it.
by AnIrishDuck | 2025-08-27 05:37:02+00:00
> ChatGPT is a program. The kid basically instructed it to behave like that.

I don't think that's the right paradigm here.

These models are hyper agreeable. They are intentionally designed to mimic human thought and social connection.

With that kind of machine, "Suicidal person deliberately bypassed safeguards to indulge more deeply in their ideation" still seems like a pretty bad failure mode to me.

> Vanilla OpenAI models are known for having too many guardrails, not too few.

Sure. But this feels like a sign we probably don't have the right guardrails. Quantity and quality are different things.
by echelon | 2025-08-27 05:39:10+00:00
Radio signals are bunk. The transit method is where it's at.

While the transit method won't find all planets, it'll certainly find a lot of them. And with spectroscopic imaging, we'll be able to read the atmospheric spectra of these planets and have pretty good guesses for what's happening on them.

Do you think we'll find organics? Biosignatures? Technosignatures?

The survey should give us a good feel for what's out there. And as we gather data, we'll have a clearer picture of the rarity of life, intelligent or otherwise.
by BenjiWiebe | 2025-08-27 05:39:46+00:00
This is one of the most personally compelling reasons why I agree with my ADHD diagnosis - I've known for a long time that I work better in a state of chaos than not. I actually often enjoy it. And others have commented on that about me as well.

Edit: by chaos I mean things breaking down, going wrong, catching fire, etc. I accomplish things easily once I've taken so long to get to them, that they're seriously urgent.
by hliyan | 2025-08-27 05:40:39+00:00
This is the same age when I started watching Star Trek (original series). To say it had a profound impact on my interest in science and ethics is an understatement. English wasn't even my first language, but I think I picked up a lot of the themes, and my interest in science, tech and ethical philosophy continues to this day. I actually wrote this bit about introducing children to Star Trek (answer is a bit dated now): https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/6719/what-is-the-r...
by JumpCrisscross | 2025-08-27 05:41:47+00:00
> Shuttle tiles were technically reusable

Would note that Shuttle tiles were never mass manufactured. The Shuttle’s shape meant lots of unique tiles. And its lack of mass production meant each tile was basically an artisanal object.

SpaceX aims to reüse tiles over many flights. But even if some tiles need replacing after each launch, that doesn’t tank Starship per se.
by delusional | 2025-08-27 05:42:58+00:00
You're making the argument that the system is broken with an example of the system working? I guess the semantic trick is that you don't reveal that the system actually stopped him until the very end of the comment, and in much less space. About 2/3 of the comment is describing the warrent, only the last 1/3 reveals that it's a nothing burger because it was denied.

Obviously law enforcement are going to cut corners. They're human beings, who are mostly interested in stopping crime. That's exactly why we force them to get warrents, to have a dispassionate believer in "the Law" as an ideal concept check in with their investigation.
by bbor | 2025-08-27 05:44:12+00:00
Totally agree -- those are two incredibly useful features of regex[1][2] that are often effectively irreplaceable. I could see this being a straightforward tradeoff for applications that know for sure they don't need complex regexes but still must accept patterns written by the client for some reason(?), but otherwise this seems like a hell of a way to go to replace a `timeout` wrapper.

This paragraph in particular seems very wholesome, but misguided in light of the tradeoff:

Having a library or project that is immune to these vulnerabilities would save this effort for each project that adopted it, and would save the whole package ecosystem that effort if widely adopted.

Honestly, the biggest shock here for me is that Rust doesn't support these. Sure, Python has yet to integrate the actually-functional `regex`[3] into stdlib to replace the dreadfully under-specced `re`, but Rust is the new kid on the block! I guess people just aren't writing complex regexes anymore...[4]

RE:simpler wrapper, I personally don't see any reason it wouldn't work, and dropping a whole language seems like a big win if it does. I happened to have some scaffolding on hand for the cursed, dark art of metaregexes, so AFAICT, this pattern would work for a blanket ban: https://regexr.com/8gplg Ironically, I don't think there's a way to A) prevent false-positives on triple-backslashes without using lookarounds, or B) highlight the offending groups in full without backrefs!

[1] https://www.regular-expressions.info/backref.html

[2] https://www.regular-expressions.info/lookaround.html

[3] https://github.com/mrabarnett/mrab-regex

[4] We need a regex renaissance IMO, though the feasibility of "just throw a small fine-tuned LLM at it" may delay/obviate that for users that can afford the compute... It's one of the OG AI concepts, back before intuition seemed possible!
by kergonath | 2025-08-27 05:45:02+00:00
> The price of their mistakes is permanent shunning.

This won’t work. Just look at any country that dealt with a fascist regime. The ideology gets shunned, but you don’t just cancel even 30% of a country’s population, otherwise you just create a permanent state of tension. You need a combination of very harsh punishments for the leaders and the most harmful people, but you also need a way to reintegrate most of them into the democratic process.
by motorest | 2025-08-27 05:45:22+00:00
> The big problem is debris. These higher satellites will take hundreds of years to fall out of orbit if they end up malfunctioning.

Malfunctioning is a risk, but if they are the backbone of a rival military power then this means they are also a high-value target. If the world enters a major conflict, there will be a huge volume of space debris for sure.
by sangeeth96 | 2025-08-27 05:45:30+00:00
Inspiring stuff! I didn't even expect basic Linux support on M1 to be so good in such a short time-span, leaving graphics aside. I was very pleased when I tried booting up Asahi on M1 a couple months back and went on to get work done in it and even enjoy some games.

Thanks for all your amazing contributions Alyssa and all the best for the road ahead!
by charcircuit | 2025-08-27 05:46:20+00:00
>We need these things to be legislated. Punished.

I disagree. We don't need the government to force companies to babysit people instead of allowing people to understand their options. It's purely up to the individual to decide what they want to do with their life.

>They had the tools to stop the conversation.

So did the user. If he didn't want to talk to a chatbot he could have stopped at any time.

>To steer the user into helpful avenues.

Having AI purposefully manipulate its users towards the morals of the company is more harmful.
by nlawalker | 2025-08-27 05:47:22+00:00
I like this, a couple thoughts on it:

1. I wonder if it would be more effective or land better if it didn’t mention AI at all. You’re not rejecting because of the tools they used, you’re rejecting because it’s a poor request.

2. I’d suggest an addition along the lines of “by the way, since I’m not seeing anything here that would make me think that there might just be some misunderstandings, this request makes me trust you, individually, a little bit less than I did before, and that will be reflected in how I address future requests from you. Happy to chat about it though. Please remember that trust is what makes all of this work.”
by BenjiWiebe | 2025-08-27 05:48:54+00:00
This sounds to me like getting into "You say you're depressed? Come on, snap out of it!" territory. I guess I consider psychological disorders to be a disorder when you aren't able to "snap out of it" or "just do things that are unpleasant".

Like yes, I do things that are unpleasant - ADHD doesn't mean I live a life of ease, avoiding unpleasantness all day long.
by dragonwriter | 2025-08-27 05:49:37+00:00
> They deliberately are designed to mimic human thought and social connection.

No, they are deliberately designed to mimic human communication via language, not human thought. (And one of the big sources of data for that was mass scraping social media.)

> But this, to me, feels like a sign we probably don't have the right guardrails. Quantity and quality are different things.

Right. Focus on quantity implies that the details of "guardrails" don't matter, and that any guardrail is functionally interchangeable with any other guardrail, so as long as you have the right number of them, you have the desired function.

In fact, correct function is having the exactly the right combination of guardrails. Swapping a guardrail which would be correct with a different one isn't "having the right number of guardrails", or even merely closer to correct than either missing the correct one or having the different one, but in fact, farther from ideal state than either error alone.
by coder68 | 2025-08-27 05:50:45+00:00
Ah yes this does make sense. We are definitely in agreement on the point of "wildly inefficient and subpar". I'll try out decoder model embeddings soon, e.g. Qwen/Qwen3-Embedding-8B. I'm working with largish amounts of data (200M records), so I tried to pick a good balance between size:perf:cost, using BAAI/bge-base-en-v1.5 to start (384 dim).
by jonway | 2025-08-27 05:51:51+00:00
I’ve noticed that people are often just lying as well. I’ve encountered people who will argue that someone else is paying them when it’s convenient to hand-wave away a tax increase for the sake of an argument, and later complaining about the same tariffs.

It’s very easy to be this lazy when you’re playing Politics: Tribes. There’s all sorts of dumb-shit slogans and obviously wrong memes about making china or Mexico pay, or cat boxes. They don’t care because it isn’t what’s important, it’s just expedient to parrot some shibboleths.
by timcambrant | 2025-08-27 05:53:08+00:00
He most certainly wants to make more money, but at this point I bet he first and foremost wants his company to survive long enough to join the big five arena, which doesn't seem likely.

He knows that OpenAI's has a first-mover advantage and that it won't last forever. They will spend everything they earn on salaries and Microsoft's cloud. As their competitors catch up, OpenAI's biggest asset will be Altman's reputation as international AI guru unless someone challenges that.
by rTX5CMRXIfFG | 2025-08-27 05:56:04+00:00
How are you even going to design a licensure exam when the reality of the industry is that there are a huge number of tech stacks?

Any attempt at standardizing knowledge across the industry will inevitably lead to CS theory, and people are already complaining about Leetcode.

If you make stack-specific exams on the other hand, then the notion of programming skills being transferable goes out the window, and you simply wouldn’t be hired or allowed to work on another, even internally in your current employer.

There’s much that can be said about licensure exams inhibiting growth in the technology sector, too. Since a license (if it were to have weight) would necessarily come with regulation against the practice of unlicensed software developers, you’d raise the risk for companies and entrepreneurs to invest in building products or startups that are essentially just CRUD apps, potentially making such ventures even less profitable.
Moving away from AWS lambda/SQS/SNS/Aurora, worth it?
by edweis | 2025-08-27 05:57:37+00:00
Our clients are interested in using our SaaS solution on-premises to mitigate the risk of service interruption.

Considering the opportunity, I am assessing the cost of doing on-premise deployments and maybe partially or fully moving away from AWS.

Our current stack is EC2/lambda/SQS/SNS/Aurora/S3 & minor networking setups. AWS deployments made via serverless V3. All the code is in Node.js. NGINX is used for routing.

The main benefits I see in moving away from AWS are: 1. Ease of deployment, simply do an rsync on all servers and run migrations on the sharded database. 2. No vendor lock-in 3. Cost saving, we have minor costs for now but the bill is steadily increasing.

And my main fears are:

1. Managed services: SQS/SNS/lambda/Aurora are managed for autoscaling. From experience, is it really necessary or does a bigger server do the trick? 2. Actual migration effort: we are a lean team but we found that migrating away from other services (Cognito, DynamoDB) was easier than expected. 3. Worse service: can SQS/SNS/lambda easily be replaced without feature loss? I am looking at RabbitMQ.

If anyone did a similar migration, how did it go for you? Also I am talking about on-premise but is it the best solution to mitigate the risk of service interruption?