MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by RHSeeger | 2025-08-30 06:31:34+00:00
I've described this before on occasion; I consider there to be a wide variety of tests.

- Unit test = my code works

- Functional test = my design works

- Integration test = my code is using your 3rd party stuff correctly (databases, etc)

- Factory Acceptance Test = my system works

- Site Acceptance Test = your code sucks, this totally isn't what I asked for!?!

Then there's more "concern oriented" groupings, like "regression tests", which could fall into any number of the above.

That being said, there's a pretty wide set of opinions on the topic, and that doesn't really seem to change over time.

> these kinds of tests are rarely ever worth writing

I strongly disagree. I find it very helpful to write unit tests for specific implementations of things (like a specific sort, to make sure it works correctly with the various edge cases). Do they get discarded if you completely change the implementation? Sure. But that doesn't detract from the fact that they help make sure the current implementation works the way I say it does.
by spauldo | 2025-08-30 06:32:36+00:00
I personally consider it invented. The universe is what it is. Math is a model we've collectively built that tries to work within the underlying rules of how logic works in the universe. Like all models, any disagreement with observation means our model is wrong.

But honestly, the whole question is akin to asking how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

On a separate subject, that site you linked does something strange with scrolling on Firefox mobile. Hey web devs - stop screwing around with things like scrolling! Browser devs implement scrolling in a consistent manner. You aren't making the user experience better with your silly JavaScript tricks!
by kristopolous | 2025-08-30 06:33:08+00:00
10 countries do 100%, 20 do over 90, and this data is 2 years old

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_renewab...

I'm an empiricist.

FUD about "what about where renewables aren't available " is just rhetorical handwaving. The answer, which already exists at nation-level scale is storage and infrastructure.
by dragonwriter | 2025-08-30 06:34:43+00:00
> Could anybody explain how this isn't easily circumvented by using a competitor's model?

Almost all the big hosted AI providers are publicly working on watermarking for at least media (text is more of a mixed bag); ultimately, its probably a regulatory play—the big providers expect that the combination of legitimate concerns and their own active fearmongering, combined with them demonstrating watermarking, will result in mandates for commercial AI generation services to include watermarking. This may even be part of the regulatory play to restrict availability and non-research use of open models.
by Joker_vD | 2025-08-30 06:35:52+00:00
> Modern hardware is just so complicated it would take a long time to completely document, and even longer to write a driver for.

You know, one'd think that having a complex hardware should make writing a driver easier because the hardware is able to take care of itself just fine, and provide a reasonable interface, as opposed to devices of the yore which you had to babysit, wasting your main CPU's time, and doing silly stuff like sending them two identical initialization commands with 30 to 50 microseconds delay between or whatever.
by fakedang | 2025-08-30 06:38:03+00:00
Eh, depends. It's perfectly alright to put in more than the FDIC limit in a bank with consumer banking services. The amount of scrutiny and shit they have to put up with means that they can't really try SVB type shenanigans. You can bet your ass if Wells Fargo, UBS or Chase goes under, the Fed will bail them (you) out. The alternative would be having bigger problems in your plate than that.

Source: I'm a recent Credit Suisse business banking customer. Now UBS.
by vitonsky | 2025-08-30 06:38:48+00:00
No, thanks. I already spent time to write tests while implementing a features, now I have a lot of tests that proof the feature is works fine, and I no more fear to make changes, because tests keep me safe of regression bugs.

The typical problems of any code base with no tests is a regression bugs, rigid team (because they must keep in mind all cases when code may destroy everything), fear driven development (because even team with zero rotation factor don't actually remember all problems they've fixed).
by motorest | 2025-08-30 06:38:53+00:00
> I have worked at scale - I have found countless examples of people not believing in simple solutions which eventually prevail and replace the big-complex thing.

I have worked at scale. I have found examples where simple solutions prevail due to inertia and inability or unwillingness to acknowledge the simple solutions failed to adequately address the requirements. The accidental complexity created by those simple solutions is downplayed as it would require reevaluating the simple solution, and thus run books and operations and maintenances are required as part of your daily operations because that's how the system is. And changing it would be too costly.

Let's not fool ourselves.
by imiric | 2025-08-30 06:39:42+00:00
You claim it's dogmatism, yet do the same thing in reverse. (:

Unit and integration tests test different layers of the system, and one isn't inherently better or more useful than the other. They complement each other to cover behavior that is impossible to test otherwise. You can't test low-level functionality in integration tests, just as you can't test high-level functionality in unit tests.

There's nothing dogmatic about that statement. If you disagree with it, that's your prerogative, but it's also my opinion that it is a mistake. It is a harmful mentality that makes code bases risky to change, and regressions more likely. So feel free to adopt it in your personal projects if you wish, but don't be surprised if you get push back on it when working in a team. Unless your teammates think the same, in which case, good luck to you all.
by naasking | 2025-08-30 06:41:47+00:00
> Even the simplest business problem may take a year to solve, and constantly break due to the astounding number of edge cases and scale.

Is this really because the single problem is inherently difficult, or because you're trying to solve more than one problem (scope creep) due a fear of losing revenue? I think a lot of complexity stems from trying to group disparate problems as if they can have a single solution. If you're willing to live with a smaller customer base, then simple solutions are everywhere.

If you want simple solutions and a large customer base, that probably requires R&D.
by deandwa1 | 2025-08-30 06:42:43+00:00
Yuanyii Agency is a trusted Singapore Immigration Agency with years of experience helping individuals and families secure Permanent Residency. Our team provides end-to-end guidance from preparing and submitting your PR application to ensuring all supporting documents are accurate and complete. We understand the requirements set by the Immigration & Checkpoints Authority (ICA) and tailor every application to highlight your strengths, improving your chances of approval.
by dsego | 2025-08-30 06:44:41+00:00
E2e tests are the hardest to maintain and take a lot of time for little benefit in my experience. I'm talking about simulating a browser to open pages and click on buttons. They are flaky and brittle, the UI is easily the component which gets updated the most often, it's also easy to manually test while developing during QA and UAT. It's hard to mock out things, so you either have to bootstrap or maintain a whole 2nd working system with all the bells and whistles, including authentication, users, real data in the database, 3rd party integrations etc. It's just too overwhelming for little benefit. It's also hard to cover all error cases to see if a thing works correctly or breaks subtly. Most commonly in e2e we test for the happy path just to see that the thing doesn't fall over.
by zkmon | 2025-08-30 06:45:05+00:00
Principles like these deserve to be part of curriculum for undergrad courses. People are incorrectly trained to go for some ideal forms at the cost of complexity and fragility. Every approach, idea should be put to ruthless cost-benefit comparison, without any regard to who is proposing it, or how it sounds.

Education and training sometimes enforces prejudices, rules and stigmas that evade inspection of the subject matter in raw form.

Preference to idealism probably emerged from peace times which have no struggle. Someone would be obsessed with perfectness of a sculpture only when they don't need to hunt for the next meal. The real world runs on minimal, conservative, durable and robust approaches.
by ddalex | 2025-08-30 06:45:30+00:00
Sure, but that's not why he was elected president. Well, not directly.

His Olympiad results led to him getting a doctorate at Sorbonne, which led to him speaking french, which led to impressing Macron who threw France's weight into supporting Dan.

It was a power move to replace the German influence with French influence (previous praesident was ethnic German)
by motorest | 2025-08-30 06:45:37+00:00
> If the software base is full of gotchas and unintended side-effects then the source of the problem is in unclean separation of concerns and tight coupling.

Do you know how you get such a system? When you start with a simple system and instead of redesigning it to reflect the complexity you just keep the simple system working while extending it to shoehorn the features it needs to meet the requirements.

We get this all the time, specially when junior developers join a team. Inexperienced developers are the first ones complaining about how things are too complex for what they do. More often than not that just reflects opinionated approached to problem domains they are yet to understand. Because all problems are simple once you ignore all constraints and requirements.
by aborsy | 2025-08-30 06:46:42+00:00
I spent some time searching for a good wiki a few months ago.

It depends on your use case. The simplest and oldest wiki might be Docuwiki. There is no database, and organization is based on text files in folders. You can make decent wikis with it, but it’s minimalist and can be hard for the users to use it.

Then we have enterprise solutions for collaboration by Microsoft, Google, Atlassian, etc. They can’t be used in our workplace, due to organization policy.

I went with Bookstack for a wiki to be used by a group of people. The interface and fonts are pretty, it’s super fast, installation is easy, and automatic updates have been problem free so far. The content must be organized in terms of shelves/books/chapters/pages, but some people want any number of categories and titles. It doesn’t allow a lot of customization, but the choices made are OK.

Mediawiki is complex, and takes more time to administer. It could make sense for large number of users. I stopped using it after upgrades broke the installation a few times, and, frankly, the interface looks outdated to me in most themes, and needs customization which takes time. Obviously, it’s very customizable, there are tons of resources and we know it can scale to billions of people!
by imiric | 2025-08-30 06:48:37+00:00
You can't build a house without nails and screws, though.

Sure, if you're only writing a small script, you might not need tests at all. But as soon as that program evolves into a system that interacts with other systems, you need to test each component in isolation, as well as how it interacts with other systems.

So this idea that unit tests are not useful is coming from a place of laziness. Some developers see it as a chore that slows them down, instead of seeing it as insurance that makes their life easier in the long run, while also ensuring the system works as intended at all layers.
by Epa095 | 2025-08-30 06:49:00+00:00
In a global economy I think a good national average is more important than the peaks. The genius invention will spread, and there is significant value in having a population which can utilise it.

As another example, if cancer is cured tomorrow it won't necessarily be the country which found the cure which will be cancer free first, but the one with the most competent doctors, able to use and apply the cure.
Show HN: Design inspirations on an infinite wall of UI Components
by kemyd | 2025-08-30 06:49:30+00:00
We created an infinite wall of UI components that makes finding visual inspiration for your next interface fun.

UI Components are organized by category, including hero sections, navigation bars, forms, cards, testimonials, footers, and many more.

Each component is not just a pretty mockup! You can instantly preview it, open it in the visual editor, and export clean, editable code. Compatible with Tailwind CSS, Bootstrap, Bulma, and shadcn/ui.

Export formats include HTML, JSX, TSX, Pug, Laravel, and Next.js.

I'd love your feedback! What parts feel strong, what feels off, and what else should be here?
by kristopolous | 2025-08-30 06:49:39+00:00
Can you cite any stats to back up the claim that nuclear is cheaper than solar or wind in any country, any of them, that's not over 4 years old?

The price of solar and battery storage has collapsed. It's really dramatic

This is a log scale https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/solar-pv-prices?time=earl...
by avinassh | 2025-08-30 06:49:39+00:00
I wrote the first article, and I thought documentation is clear, but then I saw comment by Hipp which got confused me:

> If you switch to WAL mode, the default behavior is that transactions are durable across application crashes (or SIGKILL or similar) but are not necessarily durable across OS crashes or power failures. Transactions are atomic across OS crashes and power failures. But if you commit a transaction in WAL mode and take a power loss shortly thereafter, the transaction might be rolled back after power is restored.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45014296

the documentation is in contradiction with this.
by Joker_vD | 2025-08-30 06:49:48+00:00
> No, the complexity usually isn't hidden. It's the driver's job to do that.

Why not, though? We used to have e.g. glass teletypes with microprocessors (8080/8051) in them that exposed a serial bus with very neat command protocol that we still use nowadays, that could boot up, init and self-test all on their own.
by jraph | 2025-08-30 06:50:26+00:00
Integration test are a compromise. e2e tests may be quite expensive to run (for a web application, you might need to run your backend and a web browser, possibly in a docker container - and the whole thing will also run slower). Efficiency matters a lot.

You can have robust testing by combining the two. You can check that the whole thing runs end to end once, and then test all the little features / variations using integration tests.

That's what we do for XWiki.

https://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Community/Testing/#HTes...
by adrian_b | 2025-08-30 06:50:28+00:00
What we know is that we use mathematical models based on the continuity of work, time and space (and on the discreteness of matter and electricity) and until now we have not seen any experiment where a discrepancy between predicted and measured values could be attributed to the falseness of the supposition that work, time and space are continuous.

Obviously this does not exclude the possibility that in the future some experiments where much higher energies per particle are used, allowing the testing of what happens at much smaller distances, might show evidence that there exists a discrete structure of time and space, like we know for matter.

However, that has not happened yet and there are no reasons to believe that it will happen soon. The theory about the existence of atoms is more than 2 millennia old, then it has been abandoned for lack of evidence, then it was revived at the beginning of the 19th century, due to accumulated evidence from chemistry, and it was eventually confirmed beyond doubt in 1865, when Johann Josef Loschmidt became the first who could count atoms and molecules, after determining their masses.

So the discreteness of matter had a very long history of accumulating evidence in favor of it.

Nothing similar applies to the discreteness of time and space, for which there has never been any kind of evidence. The only reason of the speculations about this is the analogy made with the fact that matter and electricity had been believed to be continuous, but eventually it has been discovered that they are discrete.

Such an analogy must make us keep an open mind about the possibility of work, time and space being discrete, but we should not waste time speculating about this when there are huge problems in physics that do not have a solution yet. In modern physics there are a huge amount of quantities that should be computable by theory, but in fact they cannot be computed and they must be measured experimentally. Therefore the existing theories are clearly not good enough.
by Chris_Newton | 2025-08-30 06:50:46+00:00
A compose key is very useful if you’re a typography snob — as many of us who studied mathematics and ended up learning TeX probably are… I haven’t been paying attention to exactly what I’ve typed with it lately, but I habitually use symbols like these on autopilot and they seem to render OK on any device that someone reading my writing is likely to be using:

≤ ≥ ≠ × — – “ ” ’ ° … ¹ ² ³ ™ • ♣ ♢ ♡ ♠

If you work in languages other than English but have a standard English keyboard layout, a compose key is handy for typing accents and non-English letters/ligatures too.
by mdhb | 2025-08-30 06:51:03+00:00
It’s actually an incredibly well established resistance tactic for what it’s worth.

Just to give a specific real life example, when the IRA were fighting the British one of the tactics they would use for some time was to send their female volunteers into the bars where the British soldiers would go drinking on a Friday night to flirt with them and convince them to leave with the girls thinking they would fuck. When they finally got back to the apartment where she said she lived the IRA team would appear to finish the job. You might well argue (I would even say rightly with the benefit of hindsight) that that’s a shitty tactic but that same group of people are now the largest legitimate political party in Ireland and Northern Ireland as far as I know.

But as a larger point, when your job becomes snatching innocent people off the streets with no right to a fair trial to send them to a dungeon in another country to be tortured and they have no hope of escape… I mean… you should probably expect violence in response to that.

I don’t know what on earth gave you the idea that people would just see that happening on a daily basis and just respond with marching in the streets.

A huge chunk of people would have no problem seeing that as a legitimate response. History is absolutely filled with those examples.
by kelseyfrog | 2025-08-30 06:51:25+00:00
Your concern regarding potential violence against ICE personnel is understandable; however, describing all opponents as "unhinged lunatics" conflates unlawful violence with legitimate political resistance.

Given ICE's documented record of controversial practices, it is unsurprising that strong opposition exists. A more precise distinction between protest, civil disobedience, and criminal acts would clarify your position. By resorting to broad disparagement, your argument is weakened rather than strengthened.
by teiferer | 2025-08-30 06:51:34+00:00
All seems like "fix tests" is the better advice.

Flaky test? Fix it! Make it rock solid! Slow test? Fix it! Make it fast! That can be hard (if it was easy, people would have already done it), but it's vastly more useful than deleting.

Even the mentioned overtesting requires a fix by focusing the tests on separate things. You could call that "deleting" but that's oversimplifying what's going on. Same with changed requirements.
by zaphirplane | 2025-08-30 06:53:23+00:00
The solution is more AI, in the browser to tell you this link is to a rubbish AI blog, AI in the mail client to tell you which email content to ignore and AI in the fridge, in the bathroom. Till each person is so tightly locked in a group bubble they have no idea how colourful the world is and how many different personalities exist that for the most bring something to the table
by 1gn15 | 2025-08-30 06:55:17+00:00
> “When we started the “free speech movement,” we had a bold new vision. No longer would dissenters’ views be silenced. With the government out of the business of policing the content of speech, robust debate and the marketplace of ideas would lead us toward truth and enlightenment. But it turned out that freedom of the press meant freedom for those who owned one. The wealthy and powerful dominated the channels of speech. The privileged had a megaphone and used free speech protections to immunize their own complacent or even hateful speech. Clearly, the time has come to denounce the naïve idealism of the past and offer a new movement, Speech 2.0, which will pay more attention to the political economy of media and aim at “free-ish” speech — the good stuff without the bad.”

https://openfuture.eu/paradox-of-open-responses/misunderesti...
by bawolff | 2025-08-30 06:55:23+00:00
I think its getting downvoted because they suggested that the article's copyeditor should have caught it, despite the article being right. I doubt they would have been downvoted if they just asked, but suggesting that someone failed at their job despite them actually doing it correctly tends to get people a bit uppity.

Words are arbitrary, but there really isn't any dispute what -fold means as a suffix. See the dictionary entry for it https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/-fold

Also as far as i know, this isn't just an english being weird thing, most germanic languages use "fold" the same way.
by helloplanets | 2025-08-30 06:55:34+00:00
Could you provide a link to that system prompt? Becuase I'm confused. I typed in "Are you smart?" and got this back:

> That’s a thoughtful question! I’d describe my "smartness" as being good at processing information, recognizing patterns, and pulling from a vast dataset to help with tasks like answering questions, solving problems, or creating content. However, I’m not "smart" in the human sense—I don’t have consciousness, emotions, or independent critical thinking. I rely entirely on my training data and algorithms.

> Think of me as a tool that can assist with creativity, analysis, or learning, but I lack the depth of human intuition, lived experience, or true understanding. If you’re curious, test me with a question or challenge — I’ll do my best! (smiley emoji)
by robmsmt | 2025-08-30 06:55:39+00:00
I’ve been thinking more and more with synology’s recent changes that it would open up the market for some new entrants that are like the system76 of NAS that are:

- low power cpu (arm?)

- uses latest kernel and flavor of Linux distributions

- makes own modular hardware in smallish form factor

- basic support package with slower SLAs to more professional SLAs for enterprises, I would happily pay per month to prevent enshitification if I had guaranteed support and even more so if it bundled some zero trust encrypted cloud storage.
by yorwba | 2025-08-30 06:55:54+00:00
When you truncate Matryoshka embeddings, you get the storage benefits of low-dimensional vectors with the limited expressiveness of low-dimensional vectors. Usually, what people look for in sparse vectors is to combine the storage benefits of low-dimensional vectors with the expressiveness of high-dimensional vectors. For that, you need the non-zero dimensions to be different for different vectors.