MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by propter_hoc | 2025-08-22 13:53:39+00:00
Sure - I understand these roofing, HVAC and landscaping expenses are associated to the common amenities? So if you spin out the clubhouse into a country club that members can opt to join, you can allocate the clubhouse an appropriate amount of cash. When you negotiate with the county to take over management of the grounds including the pond, you can negotiate to give them some of the reserve money for the future pond fixes.

I understand it wouldn't be easy to change all these management responsibilities, but in principle everything the HOA does can be devolved to either voluntary associations, or to public authorities (as happens in most of the rest of the world). Unlike a condo association, it's not a completely unimaginable shift what this lawmaker is proposing.
by popcorncowboy | 2025-08-22 13:53:39+00:00
This ends in Idiocracy. The graybeards will phase out, the juniors will become staff level, except.. software will just be "more difficult". No-one really understands how it works, how could they? More importantly WHY should they? The Machine does the code. If The Machine gets it wrong it's not my fault.

The TRUE takeaway here is that as of about 12 months ago, spending time investing in becoming a god-mode dev is not the optimal path for the next phase of whatever we're moving into.
by JustExAWS | 2025-08-22 13:53:46+00:00
And the ideas may or may not be bad. I don’t know enough about any of the business segments. But to paraphrase the famous Steve Jobs quote “those aren’t businesses, they are features” [1] that a company that is already in the business should be able to throw a few halfway decent engineers at and add the feature to an existing product with real users.

[1] He said that about Dropbox. He wasn’t wrong just premature. For the price of 2TB on Dropbox, you can get the entire GSuite with 2TB or Office365 with 1TB for up to five users for 5TB in all.
by mexicocitinluez | 2025-08-22 13:53:54+00:00
I need you to tell me how when I just fed Claude a 40 page Medicare form and asked it to translate it to a print-friendly CSS version and uses Cottle for templating "objectivtely" was of no value to me?

What about 20 minuets ago when I threw a 20-line Typescript error in and it explained it in English to me? What definition of "objective" would that fall under?

Or get this, I'm building off of an existing state machine library and asked it to find any potential performance issues and guess what? It actually did. What universe do you live in where that doesn't have objective value?

Am I going to need to just start sharing my Claude chat history to prove to people who live under a rock that a super-advanced pattern matcher that can compose results can be useful???

Go ahead, ask it to write some regex and then tell me how "objectively" useless it is?
by billy99k | 2025-08-22 13:54:06+00:00
I think the best skill is protection from executives. My best manager would tell the executives 'no' for ridiculous requests like cutting deadlines last minute or feature requests that didn't make sense. He also talked me up after an acquisition and I never ended up getting cut.

He was also close to retirement and didn't care about moving up the ladder. Many bad managers do and will sacrifice you and the rest of the team to make themselves look better.
by trentnix | 2025-08-22 13:54:57+00:00
The article talks a lot about appropriate management behaviors that come from humility, but I don't think humility is a skill. The skill is having an accurate and effective self-awareness. If you are (accurately) self-aware then humility (and confidence, where appropriate) is an inevitable side-effect. And that means stuff like...

Acknowledging what happened, taking responsibility, and reconnecting.

...is a reflex, not a tactic.
by privatelypublic | 2025-08-22 13:55:14+00:00
Except it has nothing to do with N-S sampling theorem. Mentioning it at all is an extremely obnoxious red-herring. Theres no sine-wave to digitize here.

Its taking a large image, and manipulating the bicubic downsampling algorithm so they get the artifacts they want. At very specific resolutions at that.
by ifyoubuildit | 2025-08-22 13:55:29+00:00
It's simple: it's just a multiplier, like power tools or heavy equipment. You can use a giant excavator to do a ton of work quickly. You can also knock the house over by accident.

People probably said the same things when the first steam shovels came around. I for one like things that make me have to shovel less shit. But you'd also have the same problems if you put every person in the company behind the controls of a steam shovel.
by tomrod | 2025-08-22 13:55:46+00:00
Georgism explicitly rejects Marx's class-based analysis and Marx's narrative of zero-sum class conflict. What symptoms Marx attributes to class conflict, George attributes to rent-seeking, something which both Georgists and capitalists agree is a corruption of capitalism, rather than an inherent element. Whereas Marxists conflate economic rent and return on capital - an economically unjustifiable leap in logic.

Marxism explicitly rejects classical liberal principles such as the rule of law, limited government, free markets, and individual rights, Georgism not only functions within those principles, but requires them.

Marxism is incompatible with individual rights due to its hostile position on private property and its insistence that all means of production be collective property. The most fundamental means of production of them all is an individual's labor. Without which, no amount of land would produce a farm, a mine, a house, or a city. And then we wonder why Marxist regimes consistently run slave labor camps.

Henry George argues that society only has the right to lay claim to economic goods produced by society, rather than an individual. Marxism recognizes no such distinction.

Georgism is fully defensible using classical economics and has been repeatedly endorsed by both classical and modern economists. Marxism is at best heterodox economics and at worst, pseudoscience.

Georgism could be implemented tomorrow if sufficient political will existed. Marxism requires a violent overthrow of the state.

Henry George himself rejected Marxism, famously predicting that if it was ever tried, the inevitable result would be a dictatorship. Unlike Marx's predictions, that prediction of George's has a 100% validation rate. And he made that prediction while Marx was still alive.

Economists from Adam Smith and David Ricardo to Milton Friedman and Joseph Stiglitz have observed that a public levy on land value (Georgism/LVT) does not cause economic inefficiency, unlike other taxes.

Suffices to say, you are not sharing a grounded opinion on Georgism.
by _mlbt | 2025-08-22 13:55:53+00:00
I personally use it as a starting point for research and for summarizing very long articles.

I’m a mostly self taught hobbyist programmer, so take this with a grain of salt, but It’s also been great for giving me a small snippet of code to use as a starting point for my projects. I wouldn’t just check whatever it generates directly into version control without testing it and figuring out how it works first. It’s not a replacement for my coding skills, but an augmentation of them.
by rs186 | 2025-08-22 13:55:58+00:00
The article is proposing a technical solution to a business problem.

I have no doubt this proposal or any other similar proposal would work well in the 90s or early 2000s. Let's go one step further and let browsers work with all those third party website and figure all the details for sharing, and websites never embed anything.

But you see, that's not the problem. These share buttons are often trojans on websites. Facebook tracks you via those share buttons even if you have never had a Facebook account. And people come up with various solutions to tackle that -- adblockers just block network traffic, while a small amount of website owners create a separate switch which you can toggle and then share with Facebook. Isn't all of that stupid? I don't see why Facebook, Instagram will be eager to opt in to this solution and make the experience good.
by matheusmoreira | 2025-08-22 13:56:14+00:00
A british man predicted this was going to happen nearly two centuries ago. His address to the courts are worth reading in their entirety, it contains everything we need to know about copyright.

https://www.thepublicdomain.org/2014/07/24/macaulay-on-copyr...

> At present the holder of copyright has the public feeling on his side. [...] Pass this law: and that feeling is at an end.

> Men very different from the present race of piratical booksellers will soon infringe this intolerable monopoly

> Great masses of capital will be constantly employed in the violation of the law

> Every art will be employed to evade legal pursuit

> and the whole nation will be in the plot

> when once it ceases to be considered as wrong and discreditable to invade literary property, no person can say where the invasion will stop

> The public seldom makes nice distinctions

> The wholesome copyright which now exists will share in the disgrace and danger of the new copyright which you are about to create
by LeifCarrotson | 2025-08-22 13:56:15+00:00
Recreational (not caves, no thank you!) diver here, jealous of your balmy 21C=70F water temps.

Here in lakes Michigan and Superior, diving on wrecks usually brings you below the thermocline to water temps from 0C to 10C ~= 50F. Only on rare inversions or at the surface at the south end of the lakes do water temps get much above 70.

You Florida, Carribean, and Central American divers have it made with your balmy water temperatures!
by Bender | 2025-08-22 13:56:53+00:00
I would guess it will vary by state laws. How about a force liquidation of all tenants in common properties and any other joint properties to pay off the HOA debts and disband the HOA's. Maybe even treat it much like a chapter 11 bankruptcy / reorg? Or get investors to pick up properties?

There must be cases of HOA's being force disbanded / dissolved in the past to use as a template. I think it's just a majority vote from home owners and submission of articles of dissolution? If enough properties could be liquidated then a good incentive could be giving home owners back a few years of dues. As a bonus all the over-zealous rules that have grown over the decades get dissolved and people just default to county and state laws.
by ChrisMarshallNY | 2025-08-22 13:56:56+00:00
As a manager, my first priority was to project/protect the corporation interests.

I always made that clear to my employees, but after that, my employees' interests generally came second (over my own).

It seemed to work. I was a manager at the same company for over 25 years, and my bosses were really tough (but fair).
by A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 | 2025-08-22 13:57:05+00:00
POC approach seems to work for me lately. It still takes effort to convince manager that it makes sense to devote time to polishing it afterwards, but some of the initial reticence is mitigated.

edit: Not a programmer. Just a guy who needs some stuff done for some of the things I need to work on.
by diggan | 2025-08-22 13:57:13+00:00
> In the Swedish schoolsystem, the idea for the past 20 years has been exactly this, that is to try to teach critical thinking, reasoning, problem solving etc rather than hard facts. The results has been...not great.

I'm not sure I'd agree that it's been outright "not great". I myself am the product of that precise school-system, being born in 1992 in Sweden (but now living outside the country). But I have vivid memories of some of the classes where we talked about how to learn, how to solve problems, critical thinking, reasoning, being critical of anything you read in newspapers, difference between opinions and facts, how propaganda works and so on. This was probably through year/class 7-9 if I remember correctly, and both me and others picked up on it relatively quick, and I'm not sure I'd have the same mindset today if it wasn't for those classes.

Maybe I was just lucky with good teachers, but surely there are others out there who also had a very different experience than what you outline? To be fair, I don't know how things are working today, but at least at that time it actually felt like I had use of what I was thought in those classes, compared to most other stuff.
by solarkraft | 2025-08-22 13:57:28+00:00
I think that it is, quite a good one, even:

- Determine the command that has to be run by the algorithm above.

This does most of the work a user would have to figure out what has to be installed on their system.

- Ask whether to run the command automatically.

This allows the “software should never install dependencies by itself” crowd to say no and figure out further steps, while allowing people who just want it to work to get on with their task as quickly as possible (who do you think there are more of?).

I think it would be fine to print out the command and force the user to run it themselves, but it would bring little material gain at the cost of some of your users’ peace (“oh no it failed, what is it this time ...”).
by fidotron | 2025-08-22 13:57:30+00:00
About 15 years ago I was introduced to an environment where approximately a hundred developers spent their lives coaxing a classic style expert system ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expert_system ) into controlling a build process to adjust the output for thousands of different output targets. I famously described the whole process as "brain damaging", demonstrated why [1], and got promoted for it.

People that spend their lives trying to get the LLMs to actually write the code will find it initially exhilarating, but in the long run they will hate it, learn nothing, and end up doing something stupid like outputting thousands of different output targets when you only need about 30.

If you use them wisely though they really can act as multipliers. People persist in the madness because of the management dream of making all the humans replaceable.

[1] All that had happened was the devs had learned how to recognize very simple patterns in the esoteric error messages and how to correct them. It was nearly trivial to write a program that outperformed them at this.
by danaris | 2025-08-22 13:57:33+00:00
The answer to that is always "you". Well, collectively.

An HOA isn't a separate body with no stake in the properties involved—that would be a property management company or something similar. It's a body made up of the people who actually live there. So while they could potentially charge you $3000 or $10,000 in bullshit fines for something they decided you did, they (usually) can't realistically charge you $3000 for dues without charging the same to everyone. Including themselves.

That said, there are definitely circumstances where an HOA is fully captured by a small clique of highly-active, highly-entitled, power-mad people with too much time on their hands and too little common sense or compassion, and they can't be gotten rid of either because of byzantine bylaws or because they actually are a majority of the people in the neighborhood.
by newpavlov | 2025-08-22 13:57:38+00:00
No, the fundamental problem (in the context of io-uring) is that futures are managed by user code and can be dropped at any time. This often referred as "cancellation safety". Imagine a future has initialized completion-based IO with buffer which is part of the future state. User code can simply drop the future (e.g. if it was part of `select!`) and now we have a huge problem on our hands: the kernel will write into a dropped buffer! In the synchronous context it's equivalent to de-allocating thread stack under foot of the thread which is blocked on a synchronous syscall. You obviously can do it (using safe code) in thread-based code, but it's fine to do in async.

This is why you have to use various hacks when using io-uring based executors with Rust async (like using polling mode or ring-owned buffers and additional data copies). It could be "resolved" on the language level with an additional pile of hacks which would implement async Drop, but, in my opinion, it would only further hurt consistency of the language.

>He even calls out how naïve completion (callbacks) leads to more allocation on future composition and points to where green threads were abandoned.

I already addressed it in the other comment.
by roncesvalles | 2025-08-22 13:58:05+00:00
I love how OP doesn't reach the most obvious conclusion that (record scratch, freeze frame) he just landed himself at a trash-tier company.

The only thing LLMs are doing here is surfacing the fact that your company hired really bad talent.

And no, basing your team in Arkansas or Tbilisi or whatever, not doing Leetcode interviews, and pinky-promising you're the Good Guys™ (unlike evil Meta and Google *hmmphh*) doesn't exempt you from the competitive forces of the labor market that drive SWE salaries well into the mid six figures, because tbh most people don't really mind grinding Leetcode, and most people don't really mind moving to the Bay Area, and most people don't really mind driving in to work 5 days a week, and they definitely don't give a shit whether their company's mission is to harvest every newborn's DNA to serve them retina-projected cigarette ads from the age of 10, or if it's singing privacy-respecting kumbaya around the FOSS bonfire.

You only get what you pay for, not a lick more.

LLMs are going to put these shitty companies in a really bad state while the spade-sellers laugh their way to the bank. I predict within 24 months you're going to see at least one company say they're enforcing a total ban on LLM-generated code within their codebase.
by Wowfunhappy | 2025-08-22 13:58:17+00:00
Thank you!

> What's your experience with those shady USB-C to Magsafe 2 cables/adapters?

I don't have experience--I would probably try to get a real one. I'm also a big proponent of getting batteries replaced. I know this all costs money, but if you like and are using this computer, make it nice!
by dingdingdang | 2025-08-22 13:58:27+00:00
This so many times over, using/introducing AI in an already managerially dysfunctional organisation is like giving automatic weapons to a band of vikings - it will with utmost certitude result in a quickening of their demise.

A demise that in the case of a modern dysfunctional organisation would otherwise often be arriving a few years later as a results of complete and utter bureaucratic failure.

My experience is that all attempts to elevate technology to a "pivotal force" for the worse is always missing the underlying social and moral failure of the majority (or a small, but important, managerial minority) to act for the common good rather than egotistic self-interest.
by boesboes | 2025-08-22 13:58:34+00:00
What is going on? We are blaming poor management and coaching/training on a tool again. It doesn't work, just as much as tools are never the answer to cultural problems. But blaming (or fixing) the tech is easy, that's why devops never really became more then increasingly complex shell scripting instead of having a real discussion on collaboration, shared goals and culture.

But it's a natural part of the cycle i think. Assembly language, compilers, scripting languages, application development frameworks... All lead to a new generation of programmers that "dont' understand anything!" and "it's just useful for the lazy!"..

I call BS. This is 100% a culture and management problem. I'd even go so far as to say, it is our responsibility as seniors to coach this new generation into producing quality and value with the tools they have. Don't get me wrong, I love shouting at clouds; i even mumble angrily at people in the streets sometimes and managers are mostly idiots; but we are the only ones that can guide them to the light so to speak.

Don't blame the tool, fix the people.
by firesteelrain | 2025-08-22 13:58:42+00:00
Right agree and I think I have tried to articulate that here and below. Florida law says what to do when HOAs are dissolved. Point is it will be extremely messy to suddenly dissolve hundreds or thousands of HOAs. Windfall for the State too because the money by default needs to go somewhere and it won’t go back to the homeowners (which ones btw current or past, law doesn’t speak to it). So it goes to the State based on the sale of the land and properties.

I don’t think homeowners will be universally pleased with this.
by thomashabets2 | 2025-08-22 13:59:14+00:00
Rust: Well yes. Rust does force you to understand the things, or it won't compile. It does have drawbacks.

Go: goroutines are not async. And you can't understand goroutines without understanding channels. And channels are weirdly implemented in Go, where the semantics of edge cases, while well defined, are like rolling a D20 die if you try to reason from first principles.

Go doesn't force you to understand things. I agree with that. It has pros and cons.

I see what you mean but "cheap threads" is not the same thing as async. More like "current status of massive concurrency". Except that's not right either. tarweb, the subject of the blog post in question, is single threaded and uses io_uring as an event loop. (the idea being to spin up one thread per CPU core, to use full capacity)

So it's current status of… what exactly?

Cheap threads have a benefit over an async loop. The main one being that they're easier to reason about. It also has drawbacks. E.g. each thread may be light weight, but it does need a stack.
by 8cvor6j844qw_d6 | 2025-08-22 13:59:21+00:00
On my daily browser with V8 JIT disabled, Cloudflare Turnstile has the worst performance hit, and often requires an additional click to clear.

Anubis usually clears in with no clicks and no noticeable slowdown, even with JIT off. Among the common CAPTCHA solutions it's the least annoying for me.
by csomar | 2025-08-22 13:59:31+00:00
> For the uninformed: if you cannot complete KYC or proof of wealth checks, you do not lose your money.

Your money indefinitely frozen without a clear process that requires lawyers, courts, money?, and time is essentially you losing your money.

That is the problem with this approach if you are a small guy. A big guy/corporation can pull other resources to fight this. You can't as it is probably your only bank account.
by dinfinity | 2025-08-22 14:00:27+00:00
I concur. Something to keep in mind is that it is often more robust to pull an LLM towards the right place than to push it away from the wrong place (or more specifically, the active parts of its latent space). Sidenote: also kind of true for humans.

That means that positively worded instructions ("do x") work better than negative ones ("don't do y"). The more concepts that you don't want it to use / consider show up in the context, the more they do still tend to pull the response towards them even with explicit negation/'avoid' instructions.

I think this is why clearing all the crap from the context save for perhaps a summarizing negative instruction does help a lot.
by ascendantlogic | 2025-08-22 14:00:32+00:00
Anecdotally I'm already seeing this on a small scale. People who vibe coded a prototype to 1 mil ARR are realizing that the velocity came at the cost of immense technical debt. The code has reached a point where it is essentially unmaintainable and the interest payments on that technical debt are too expensive. I think there's going to be a lot of money to be made over the next few years un-fucking these sort of things so these new companies can continue to scale.
by morkalork | 2025-08-22 14:00:41+00:00
I feel that even though I'm getting older, LLMs make me feel younger. There's things I learned in university 10 years ago that I only hazily remember but I can easily interrogate an AI and refresh myself way faster than opening old books. Just as a device for recall alone that's been trained on every power point slide that's been uploaded on lecturers websites, it's useful.