MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by chrismorgan | 2025-08-19 16:58:09+00:00
Intent to remove: emergency services dialling (911, 112, 000, &c.)

Almost no one ever uses it: metrics show only around 0.02% of phone calls use this feature. So we’re planning on deprecating and then removing it.

—⁂—

Just an idea that occurred to me earlier today. XSLT doesn’t get a lot of use, but there are still various systems, important systems, that depend upon it. Links to feeds definitely want it, but it’s not just those sorts of things.

Percentages only tell part of the story. Some are tiny features that are used everywhere, others are huge features that are used in fewer places. Some features can be removed or changed with little harm—frankly, quite a few CSS things that they have declined to address on the grounds of usage fall into this category, where a few things would be slightly damaged, but nothing would be broken by it. Other features completely destroy workflows if you change or remove them—and XSLT is definitely one of these.
by Ancapistani | 2025-08-19 16:59:12+00:00
I don't understand how it became the expectation that media report truth. That has _never_ been the case, since the founding of the country.

Media's role is to provide facts, sources, and synthesis. It's a starting point for discourse, not an immutable record.

If you expect _any_ media outlet to be 100% reliable and without bias, you're going to be sorely disappointed.
by culturengine | 2025-08-19 16:59:40+00:00
Hi HN! I'm Andrew from Spatial Magic (https://spatialmagic.ai).

This project uses computer vision to track body movement and simulate pro skating moves in real-time. You can ollie, manual, 180, 360, and grind. Crouching in a squat position will boost your speed.

Video demo: https://youtu.be/RPbfttCTpDE

Running on a MacBook Pro, we've optimized the latency to ~10ms, so the avatar feels like it mirrors your body movements and represents you, which makes the experience much more expressive and immersive.

This is part of a bigger effort, where we're building spatial computing experiences beyond wearables.

We'd love feedback on what tricks and gameplay you would like to see next!
by James3356 | 2025-08-19 16:59:54+00:00
I'm James from USA I was a victim of bitcoin scam and I lost up to £140,000 within 2 months. All hope was lost because I can’t believe I’m the one losing that amount of money in just 2 months. Thanks to Christopher my friend. He stud by me and make sure I get back my lost funds. Both of us started looking for they way out by doing some research. Thank goodness he was able to find recoverydarek@gmail. com I contacted him immediately. He asked for some information concerning how I was scammed, and also some little commitment which I did asap. After 24 hours, I received a notification of £140,000 sent to my personal coin base wallet address. I was so shocked and surprised, I contacted the expert immediately to know if the money I just received is my lost bitcoin. He replied back and said congratulations. How wish I can do something else to recommend your company apart from this testimony.
by acjohnson55 | 2025-08-19 17:00:22+00:00
I don't think I've ever had anything fail on me diving, but I've been with people who have run out of air (my buddy was constantly using all his up), so having to breathe off someone else's tank isn't uncommon.

As I mentioned in my sibling comment, I did have a scary time on the Blue Hole. I think my other most nervous dives were:

- Pacific dive in Costa Rica in rough seas and surge. We suddenly had visibility drop to near zero when we hit the outflow current of a river. Definitely a lesson in how quick conditions can change.

- Cavern diving in a cenote in Mexico. Nothing weird happened, but we went kinda far in, and I get nervous in overhead environments.
by xg15 | 2025-08-19 17:00:45+00:00
I think this post is useful where the thread author proposed some solutions to the people affected: https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/11523#issuecomment-318...

The main thing that seems unaddressed is the UX if a user opens a direct link to an XML file and will now just see tag soup instead of the intended rendering.

I think this could be addressed by introducing a <?human-readable ...some url...?> processing instruction that browsers would interpret like a meta tag redirect. Then sites that are interested could put that line at the top of their XML files and redirect to an alternative representation in HTML or even to a server-side or WASM-powered XSLT processor for the file.

Sort of like an inverse of the <link rel="alternate" ...> solution that the post mentioned.

The only thing this doesn't fix is sites that are abandoned and won't update or are part if embedded devices and can't update.
by the_af | 2025-08-19 17:01:15+00:00
For the record, I also found #2 jarring.

I understand you cannot write as if walking on egg shells; you have your position and maybe your readers do as well. But this is far from a settled matter, and Chiang's position (which was describing earlier rather than current LLMs, but I still think it arguably holds today) is arguably correct, or valid. I probably agree with Chiang more than I agree with you, which is why I find it odd to call it a blind or weak spot as if the matter was settled. Maybe "while I admire Chiang, I fundamentally disagree on some topics, such as LLMs" would have felt less jarring.

(Not saying you must write like this, and it's impossible to write in a way nobody will object to. I'm just explaining why I -- and presumably the person you're responding to -- found it jarring).
by jesse__ | 2025-08-19 17:02:38+00:00
This is exactly the issue, and unordered_map exemplifies it perfectly.

On paper, unordered_map sounds great. It lists all the admirable properties you would theoretically want in a hashtable. Then in practice when you go to implement it, you realize that you've painted yourself into a garbage fire, as the saying goes.

I suppose this is a failing of the design by committee method, where the committee isn't directly responsible for implementation either before or during standard writing.
by realityfactchex | 2025-08-19 17:02:46+00:00
Is there a switch/button/config to globally disable the AI and Memory part on a server/install? Or to disable it before beginning a new session/call? Or to turn it off once a call started?

Some people may make use of something like this for meetings, but not want it all recorded and indexed etc. -- to make use of the Zoom replacement part, but making the Granola part fully optional?

I get it's open source and a coder could make this change. Just asking again, since I asked about this a previous time it was posted [0].

Still looks good!

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44905476
by Ancapistani | 2025-08-19 17:02:56+00:00
That is clearly protected speech. For it to be anything else requires a state-sponsored arbiter of truth, which is such an anti-pattern that Orwell featured it as a central theme in Nineteen Eighty-Four.

As for libel/slander laws - truth is an affirmative defense. If your "proof" is factual -- even if it's insufficient to prove your claim -- then go for it.

> it feels like American's fundamentally don't understand how our right to free speech works and what it is for.

I agree 100%.
by eviks | 2025-08-19 17:03:13+00:00
> way; it was superpowered with keyboard shortcuts that just made sense

No, that's under-powered.

Powered is when you can define multiple simple custom shortcuts (as far as I understand, at least Zen allows 1 shortcut change for some commands (unlike 0 in the dumb FF), so halfway there, not sure about Arc).

Super powered is when you can add key sequences and keys without modifiers depending on context in addition to a simple shortcuts.

Uberpowered would be the equivalent of QMK within the app (tap vs hold, home row mods left vs right alt, all 4 modifiers, etc etc), but when you can have conditions based on app contexts and dynamic user defined conditions (eg, in the simplest way, have vim-like modal editing in text fields with word jumps and single key navigation outside).

While uberpowered apps are unicorns, among relatively known browsers think only Vivaldi has has power

> Firefox remains the gold standard for user-first browsing.

What's gold about poor customization (no keybind, but also changing UI is cumbersome) and bad defaults?

> why isn’t it Firefox?

Oh, why indeed! Something about lack of incentives to innovate of even listen to users much when you're a big company financed by "ulterior" sources
by inetknght | 2025-08-19 17:03:16+00:00
tl;dr:

In a multi-threaded context, memory reads and writes can be reordered by hardware. It gets more complicated with shared cache. Imagine that you have core 1 writing to some address at (nearly) the same time that core 2 reads from that. Does core 2 read the old or the new? Especially if they don't share the same cache -- core 1 might "write" to a given address, but it only gets written to core 1's cache and then "scheduled" to be written out to main memory. Meanwhile, later core 2 tries to read that address, it's not in its cache, so it pulls from main memory before core 1's cache has flushed. As far as core 2 is concerned, the write happened after it read from the address even though physically the write finished in core 1 before core 2's read instruction might have even started.

A memory barrier tells the hardware to ensure that reads-before is also "happens-before" (or after) a given writen to the same address. It's often (but not always) a cache and memory synchronization across cores.

I found Fedora Pikus's cppcon 2017 presentation [1] to be informative, and Michael Wong's 2015 presentation [0] filled in some of the gaps.

C++, being a generic language for many hardware implementations, provides a lot more detailed concepts for memory ordering [2], which is important for hardwares that have more granularity in barrier types that what most people are used to with x86-derived memory models.

[0]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DS2m7T6NKZQ

[1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZQFzMfHIxng

[2]: https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/atomic/memory_order.html
by sugarpimpdorsey | 2025-08-19 17:04:01+00:00
> Representatives from Chrome/Blink, Safari/Webkit, and Firefox/Gecko are all supportive of removing XSLT

Did anybody bother checking with Microsoft? XML/XSLT is very enterprisey and this will likely break a lot of intranet (or $$$ commercial) applications.

Secondly, why is Firefox/Gecko given full weight for their vote when their marketshare is dwindling into irrelevancy? It's the equivalent of the crazy cat hoarder who wormed her way onto the HOA board speaking for everyone else. No.
by dc396 | 2025-08-19 17:04:15+00:00
> DNSSEC was created because we needed to put root and gTLD servers in Russia and China (lying authoritatives).

Interesting assertion -- do you have anything to back this up?

While DNSSEC can prevent a name server operator from effectively modifying zone data (at least without the signing key and for resolvers that bother to validate), protecting against an authoritative name server operator from maliciously modifying the zone data in their server was not a significant consideration in any of the IETF/implementation discussions I was in (back in the late 90s, I ran ISC during the development of BIND 9.0 and participated quite heavily in DNS-related working groups).

Transport security obviously only protects the channel of communication. It does nothing for ensuring the authenticity of the data. In order to protect the data so it doesn't matter where the data comes from (authoritative, resolver, off the back of a truck, etc.), you have to take the steps DNSSEC takes. This was recognized as far back as 1993.
by muhammadbsabir | 2025-08-19 17:04:25+00:00
Thanks! You’re right, the big players mostly ignore these languages. The additional challenge is the lack of online data, so we spend a lot of effort on data collection and labeling on the ground.

Also companies like ElevenLabs, and Deepgram have done well by focusing on specific use cases, even when the big labs are amazing at English.

Right now these languages are underserved, so there’s a window to build the best models for these languages.
by thewebguyd | 2025-08-19 17:04:38+00:00
> If "protecting children" requires sacrificing freedom for everyone, then children should not be protected.

Agreed. It all goes back to the famous quote "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." (granted, the quote was about taxation but the principle applies here)

Much like cybersecurity, it's always a trade off between absolute freedom and absolute safety. You don't get both. Every "safety" measure that gets put in place reduces your level of individual freedom. Go to far in the safety direction and you lose all your freedoms, and that trade off IMO is not worth it.
by spwa4 | 2025-08-19 17:04:51+00:00
You should look at the total effect of debt if your intention is to study what would happen without debt. So the total effect is:

1) 150 billion per year net new borrowing

2) 115 billion per year interest payments

Conclusion: the effect on the budget of stopping this whole debt thing would be a net cost of either 150 or 265 billion per year (because you "lose" the new debt, but you still have to pay the interest payments), or about triple the current budget cost of debt, or 12% to 21% of the total government budget.

The cost of making the debt fall as fast as it was rising would be 150b + 150b + 115b = 415 billion per year, call it 33% of the government budget.

In contrast, making the problem worse at the current rate has a 3% positive effect on the budget. This will not change in the near future. It's exponential and it itself rises at about 8% per year, in other words, next year it'll be 3.2% (and the government could choose to force the banks' hands to get that down)

In other words: the government will do the opposite of what everyone's suggesting here, regardless of labour vs conservatives. Either party will increase lending and make the problem worse, faster. Why? Simple: they sure as hell aren't about to give up a quarter of the budget, especially when worsening the problem actually still has a positive effect on the budget (and a strong negative effect on the problem). Note that the interest payments are actually the smaller part of this. Not borrowing fresh money is between 60% and 70% of the "cost".

Which also shows that the problem is not the rich. Well, unless you count the government. And yes, I count organizations that spend 10% more than they "can" as rich. If spending more than your fair share isn't being rich, I don't know what is.

Furthermore the "reduce debt" is a trap argument. It ignores forget ... we die. Most of UK government expenditure is labor. In other words, reducing the debt, even just stopping the rise in debt, is effectively asking us to work harder now, in trade for the country being in a (let's be honest - slightly) better position in 10 years. So you're expected to give a lot up now, in trade for giving the rich more money now (and less in the future). But you'll die, and if you're 40 or above, the calculus will show that you'll get more government services before you die at 72 if we let the situation become worse, rather than fix it.
by shadowgovt | 2025-08-19 17:05:16+00:00
"Material harm now for maybe long-term good later" has been the goal of many a soul-saver throughout history... And they tend to go down in history as the problem, not the solution.

Regarding loci of control: I've been using mapping tools built on OpenStreetMap as of late, and they're good, but they're no replacement for Google Maps. Things Google makes simple like "restaurants near me" are just fall-flat-on-your-face bad in most of the OSM clients I've seen. So I'm loathe to declare we need to kill the working thing when the alternative is worse. My preferred approach to ending a Google map monopoly would be to invest in making the alternatives better (particularly the open alternatives). Give people a better option, and we won't have to "kill" Google; the market will do it for us.
by ejp | 2025-08-19 17:05:53+00:00
OpenSCAD is great for functional parts, built of basic components. It can start to be good for moderate complexity components with the BOSL library (I use BOSL2) including chamfers/fillets where needed. And the parametric/customization aspect is second to none - IF it's built with that in mind.

Where it really falls down is when you need to somehow get data OUT of the model to feed to other shapes. I would love to be able to specify a chamfer or fillet along a contact edge of two other shapes, but unless you know the exact contact shape, location, and size a priori you will have a tough time getting anything to line up. If you want to use a mesh or model as a negative, every model's zero coordinate needs to be just right or it will just be entirely misaligned.

I've also tried to spend some time performance optimizing for render/output. It is not cooperative at all. It will just soak CPU time for a minute at a time for not even a complex shape! As pseudosudoer said, it really goes off the rails.

But for functional connectors, adapters, and replicating parts, it's great to be able to leverage my software skills in 3D modeling!
by AnthOlei | 2025-08-19 17:06:28+00:00
Does anyone else think this method of discourse incredibly rude? This poster posted a quasi researched comment that looks surface credible. A HN user took the time to respond to each point - only for the response to the response to be “whoops sorry, wasted your time!”

Feels like a breach of social contract. I used to see help requests that were well written as a signal of effort - as in “I’ll put in the effort to help since they did”
by junon | 2025-08-19 17:06:32+00:00
If you mean memory barriers in terms of concurrency, it's just a primitive for concurrency that counts downward atomically once per participant (e.g. a group of threads) and then each atomically waits until the counter reaches zero before continuing. It's used to synchronize (i.e. put into lockstep) two concurrent processes such that they must all wait at a given point before continuing more or less all at once, often as part of a larger process.

If you mean a barrier in terms of a memory "fence", that's an event on CPUs whereby any pending memory instructions that have been pipelined and thus not committed are forced to commit and complete before continuing. Usually only relevant for a single core, but they're used to make sure that other cores will see the same memory values and your pending writes would reflect (or, conversely, sometimes making sure your own core sees the reads from other cores as fresh as possible before the actual read op).
by ummonk | 2025-08-19 17:07:00+00:00
This seems like the kind of thing that won't require any resources to maintain, other than possible bugfixes (which 3rd parties can provide). It only requires parsing and DOM manipulation, so it doesn't really require any features of JS or WASM that would be deprecated in the future, and the XSLT standard that is supported by browsers is frozen - they won't ever have to dedicate resources to adding any additional features.
by iamlintaoz | 2025-08-19 17:07:08+00:00
Really appreciate it. I am the CEO of EloqData. We submitted the ShowHN about a year ago [1]. Since then we made a lot of progress, much of the work is based on the feedback from the great HN community, including:

1) Open Source (GPL and AGPL) (thanks PeterZaitsev).

2) Session based transaction in Redis API. (thanks fizx)

3) Better explanation of the architecture [2] (thanks apavlo).

4) Testing with Jepsen (internally, we will do it officially when we have the resource) (thanks jacobn, among others).

Again, thanks, really appreciate the community support. Please go to our website [3] or join our discord channel to provide more feedback.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41590905

[2] https://www.eloqdata.com/blog/2025/07/14/technology

[3] https://eloqdata.com
by dragonwriter | 2025-08-19 17:08:15+00:00
> Why should the browser contain a specific template engine, like XSLT,

XSLT is a templating language (like HTML is a content language), not a template engine like Blink or WebKit is a browser engine.

> Also it can be reimplemented using JS or WASM.

Changing the implementation wouldn't involve taking the language out of the web platform. There wouldn't need to be any standardization talk about changing the implementation used in one or more browsers.
by throwmeaway222 | 2025-08-19 17:08:19+00:00
The system is working as expected however. I get that a lot of people see wealth concentration as a bad thing, but it's just part of the system. If those wealthy people are willing to spend - then it goes back into the economy and prices rise, but people are getting paid for things.

If they hold onto it, then prices stabilize, the value of the dollar temporarily goes up. At some point these rich people spend all of it somehow.

And if you, as a person that demands more pay, then just ask. If you get a no, quit. It's as simple as that. No one should be forced to do anything different. I wouldn't ask you to give up half your salary?
by the_af | 2025-08-19 17:08:35+00:00
PKD and Chiang -- I hadn't thought of this comparison, but as a fan of both, it rings true.

Didn't PKD even write a nightmarish story about god and angels being literally true and punishing the infidel that echoes Chiang's story about "Hell.."?

I don't think Chiang is drier than PKD. I think he's a saner PKD, without the tendency to psychedelic ramblings. I say this as an absolute fan of PKD!
by garaetjjte | 2025-08-19 17:09:49+00:00
Benaphore is a kernel synchronization object behind atomic counter for uncontended path. But the kernel object needs to be always here, initialized and destroyed when appropriate.

Futex doesn't need any kernel initialization, and from perspective of kernel it doesn't exist at all when there are no waiters.

(see also CRITICAL_SECTION, which originally always had kernel object created with it, but it was later changed to create them on-demand falling back to keyed event on failure. SRWLock only uses keyed events. Keyed event only needs one object per process, and otherwise consumes kernel resources only if there are any waiters.)
by NoGravitas | 2025-08-19 17:10:03+00:00
It could be. The meaningful argument is over whether the javascript polyfill should be built into the browser (in which case, browser support remains the same as it ever was, they just swap out a fast but insecure implementation for a slow but secure one), or whether site operators, principally podcast hosts, should be required to integrate it into their sites and serve it.

The first strategy is obviously correct, but Google wants strategy 2.
by kokanator | 2025-08-19 17:10:51+00:00
Perhaps faith is a type of choice and in either case difficult.

1. We see often where people deny an objective choice. Even those choices that are predominately 'good' and instead choose those that are predominately 'destructive'.

2. A choice to accept forgiveness is exceedingly difficult as the first step is to accept limits of your own power. That is to say, you must accept another's greater ability to forgive than your own.

In either case, regardless of the objective nature of the 'choice' they remain difficult for humans to make.
by ifeoluwak | 2025-08-19 17:10:55+00:00
Hi guys, I would like to get your honest opinion and feedback about a product I plan on building. It is a niche product for mobile apps built with React Native. Basically it’s a CMS like wordpress for RN apps to help product managers, digital marketers to manage content and UI instead of needing devs and waiting for App Store reviews. It will have a visual editor to help you add buttons, text, banners, lists etc. Is this worth building?