MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by rcxdude | 2025-08-31 09:28:29+00:00
having used the AM3358 extensively, the TRM is not complete. There are some pretty important and complex systems that have literally no documentation at all in the TRM, not to mention the large number of quirks and small details that you can only pick up from a scattering of other areas (including a wiki that TI deleted some years ago). It is, however, miles better than the documentation available for most SOCs.
by LargoLasskhyfv | 2025-08-31 09:28:41+00:00
Europe has the technology and experience to solve geo-social problems by turning itself into a cozy castle with high walls. The hostiles will be used as feedstock for alcalic hydrolysis at industrial scale/faster than replacement/birthing rate until the zones have been fully sanitized. Problems turned into fertilizer for nukkular powered greenhouses.
by vkazanov | 2025-08-31 09:29:28+00:00
Parsing is almost always a part of a programming language compiler but it doesn't have to be.

When we parse a string, we go up from low-level human-readable strings to intermediate parse trees to a high-level AST.

A process of compilation goes down from some kind of a high-level internal representation through phases to something that is close to the target low-level language.

It can go down from an AST, or LLVM-s internal representation, or whatever.

Problems solved by both processes are different:

1. Parsing is about finding string patterns (using regexps or PEGs or whatever) and representing these using a more strict high-level structure. The structure is usually tree-like but is also often a graph.

2. Compiling takes something high-level (a tree, a graph, etc) and emits something different, usually simplified.

A good example is a typical lisp implementation where the parser is trivial but compilation phases represent numerous simplifying phases.
by wqaatwt | 2025-08-31 09:31:07+00:00
> fraction of aeral bombing damage of west Europe

What specifically does that mean? Yes all major cities in Germany were destroyed. In the rest of Western Europe damage was much more localized.

Regardless China had some period of mass conflict on an extremely high scale.

There was a mass state instigated campaign of destroying historical sites ar artifacts as late as the 1960s and 70s.
by ben_w | 2025-08-31 09:33:14+00:00
> Radical life extension within our lifetimes has become secular religion substitute. It’s driven more by hope and faith than by scientific fact.

Did someone prove mice have souls that go to heaven or hell while I wasn't looking?

For all the limits of research that only works in mice and doesn't generalise to humans (I'm *not* going to plan with the assumption of radical longevity) it's not quite as bad as taking everythin on faith.
by teleforce | 2025-08-31 09:33:16+00:00
> this actually does seem kind of like a good thing for AI to do

Actually this type of applications should be the killer application of AI.

The extreme analogy is that robot instead of human should explore the nuclear incident of Chernobyl and Fukushima.

Now we're trying to build automated analysis of ECG interpretation using AI. In order to interpret standard 12-lead ECG waveforms signal of 5 minutes for Afib detection that's equivalent of 60 minutes duration. For long duration multi-lead Holter ECG it's at least 24-hour, but I think you get the idea.

You can hire cardiologist that interpret the ECG but you probably need sub-specialist cardiologists specializing in ECG interpretation for the best results but only handful of them exist in the world with ratio of 1:100K or 1:1M for experts:populations, depending on where you're living. These expert cardiologist would rather spent the time doing more meaningful exercises for them like pace maker & IPC surgeries, teaching future cardiologists, and having holidays once in a blue moon.Even they can mistake due to human errors and other limitations. Thus this exercise is tailor made for AI.
by saaaaaam | 2025-08-31 09:34:40+00:00
Unless you’re a big artist most tours break even at best, but more often lose money. That loss is sometimes supported by the label investing some money because tours can be a good way to market music and find new audiences. A lot of venues also take big commissions on merch, squeezing the profitability on that part of the business.

Unfortunately for a lot of smaller artists the economics of touring are not great. 1000 tickets at $25 does not equal $25000 in the artist’s pocket.

The artist will maybe get 70% of those ticket sales (the promoter gets a significant cut) and the artist needs to pay her touring costs out of her share. If you’re an artist going on tour with a four piece band, and tour manager/instrument tech then your daily costs are going to be thousands of dollars.

Everyone needs to be paid from that split and all the travel, accommodation and food costs need to be paid, and sometimes the cost of local support acts is paid from the artist’s share.

The agent who secured the booking gets a percentage, and the manager who looks after the artist’s career gets a percentage. After commissions, $25000 in ticket sales might mean the artist only sees $10000 - before she has paid the costs of the tour. With at least six people to be paid (four musicians and the tour manager plus the artist) and accommodated, fed and moved around, that $10000 really doesn’t go very far.

If it’s a band the economics are no different really - all the band members need to make a living while they are on the road.

And of course if that’s 300 tickets at $20 rather than 1000 at $25 none of these costs scale down, the musicians aren’t going to take less, hotel rooms aren’t going to drop in price.

Pirating the music and going to see the ban play live might actually mean the label says “live brings us no uptick on our recordings, so we are not going to invest in tour support for this artist”.
by HeadsUpHigh | 2025-08-31 09:34:53+00:00
>Sleeping well, eating well and exercising does work. Science about this is well-established. So why arent we?

Those will give you at best another marginal decade. By all means worth doing but its not radical life extension. At the same time a young body can take lack of sleep and can physically perform even if not exercising much better than an old one. So there's more to it than just lifestyle.
by glp1guide | 2025-08-31 09:36:11+00:00
That sounds like a terrible experience, sorry you and the wife went through that and somehow the negative side effects STILL persist. This is honestly the first case I’ve ever heard of such an adverse effect.

GLP1s are certainly not for everyone, and if she had that reaction on a starting dosage then it certainly is obvious stopping was the way to go.

That said, for the vast majority of people though, GLP1s are likely going to the key to living longer and carrying less weight (including into old age). At this point, the research is behind the drugs being useful for the vast majority of the population, and the literal millions of people taking these drugs do not seem to be running into such horrific side effects, especially ones that continue after stopping the drugs.

Would you mind sharing which GLP1 she was on? This actually sounds like something that should be more widely known. Throwing up forever is quite a crippling side effect, and since GLP1s are more recently considered primarily brain drugs, I wonder if it triggered a persistent chemical imbalance.
by Borealid | 2025-08-31 09:36:32+00:00
I think it's worth mentioning that with a patent, nobody else is allowed to use the patented idea. This holds even if they have never heard of you before, and were entirely unaware your patent (or your version of the patented concept) existed. You are granted a monopoly.

With a copyright, people are allowed to do anything similar to you, so long as they do not derive their work from yours. Someone unaware of your work cannot infringe your copyright. You do not have a monopoly on anything, you are just protected against someone deriving their work from yours directly.

This difference probably factors into how easy it is to win a lawsuit: for a copyright infringement, you need to show they made a copy. You wouldn't be bringing suit in the first place if there were substantial doubt in that area. It also factors into how easy it should be to get a patent vs a copyright: a patent closes off much, much, MUCH more idea-space than a copyright.
by e-topy | 2025-08-31 09:36:34+00:00
European here. I've been to the US and holy mother of Jesus, you put sooooo much sugar into everything. I had to buy 'European' bread because your normal bread made my gums hurt, and even then that was the sweetest bread I've ever eaten.

Seriously, when your one large oreo shake has 2600 calories, no wonder your obesity rate is 35% and isn't slowing. Driving to the toilet instead of walking also doesn't help. Then your hospitals get overrun with preventable diseases and healthcare gets expensive. This isn't a 'caring' problem when getting fat is the only option for most people, the way most people life is specifically designed to make you obese.
by abenga | 2025-08-31 09:36:56+00:00
> It is unreasonable if it leads to users losing data.

Changing the kernel development process to allow adding new features willy-nilly late in the RC cycle will lead to much worse things than a few people using an experimental file system losing their data in the long term.

The process exists for a reason, and the kernel is a massive project that includes more than just one file system, no matter how special its developers and users believe it is.
by hnlmorg | 2025-08-31 09:37:57+00:00
I’m not being defeatist. I’m literally just pointing out the reality of consumer trends.

There is oodles of research into this topic. It isn’t something I’ve just made up.

It’s why analytics exist to explore website user journeys and then promoting the most important calls to action in prominent places.

It’s why physical store fronts put the doors at the front of the shop rather than on the side (side note: a friend of mine does own a shop and when he had to have the front door closed for repair, he saw a sharp decline in random walk-ins because people didn’t want to use the side door).

It’s why Facebook, Reddit, Twitter, GitHub, LinkedIn etc remaining dominant platforms in their respective domains despite almost universal dislike for those platforms.

It’s why supermarkets put their product with the highest margin in the centre of the shelves and the lower margin items at the top and bottom.

It’s why being on page 2 of Googles search results are as good as not being in Google at all.

I’d actually love it if your idealistic view were true in practice. I don’t want to depend on GitHub, LinkedIn, YouTube. But that’s where the masses are so I need to use it too.

I already ditched WhatsApp for Signal, but after several years without WhatsApp, I still haven’t converted all my family. So I miss out on sooo much conversations because of my ideals.

What you’re advocating simply doesn’t match the reality of how people shop for content. Be that free stuff on social platforms, nor purchasing physical products in stores. It’s not defeatist to say consumers are lazy. It’s just a sad fact of life. And ignoring that fact doesn’t magically make it untrue.
by pendenthistory | 2025-08-31 09:38:02+00:00
Whenever someone claims to enjoy or love their job, I'm extremely suspicious. Usually it's some form of cope, because without it how could you stand having to work 8+ hours a day for 40 years? Easier to tell yourself you actually love it. I'm sure you enjoy aspects of your work. But I would guess if you won $100m you wouldn't keep going. If you truly enjoyed it, you would do it for free.
by uludag | 2025-08-31 09:39:04+00:00
Not only this, I feel if people in the UK somehow were able to travel back in time and encounter "their culture", they'd feel extremely alienated and maybe even feel a level of disdain. The daily prayers, Bible reading, strict Sabbatarianism and religious festivals would seem completely alien. Without a doubt the modern Muslim or asian immigrant, especially after the first generation, are so much closer to the average UK resident than their traditional culture.
by nikolay | 2025-08-31 09:41:41+00:00
With all due respect, those who monitor the war in Ukraine will tell you that Anduril is overengineered and expensive. New Russian drones, produced in the thousands every day, are kits, assembled in minutes on the battlefield. Nothing fancy, crappy looks, nothing exciting, but it works and it's cheap and it manufacturing can be ramped up in no time. Not to mention that Russian innovate on the battlefield, everybody tries different modifications, and what works is communicated back. Also, commercially, there are tens and tens of private and government companies working on drones in Russia - one company can't do better than many in a competitive environment. So, unless there are 10-20 Andurils competing on speed of innovation, costs, materials, simplicity, and manufacturing speed, this is no match.
Ask HN: Clearly Learning Microservices and DevOps?
by shivajikobardan | 2025-08-31 09:41:51+00:00
Hi HN,

I’ve been working with Docker, k3s (command line), and Rancher (GUI) for a while now, but there’s one thing that’s haunted me forever: I never really understood what I was doing or why it made sense.

To me, virtualization and containerization have always felt the same. For example: - With virtualization, I can clone a VM to build a new VM(in virtualbox or hyper-v for example. I have not yet used big daddies like vmware).

- With Kubernetes, I can create replicas of pods or deployments.

But when people say things like “there’s an OS in a virtual machine but no host OS in Kubernetes,” it just doesn’t click. How can Kubernetes run without an OS? Every pod or deployment needs an OS underneath, right? In fact, I see a bigger problem with Kubernetes: instead of having a single OS like in a VM, now we have many OS instances (one per container or pod).

I recently interviewed with a DevOps team (I have 2 years of experience as a Linux IT support engineer), and questions like “What’s the difference between virtualization and containerization?” or “How many possible deployments/pods can a k3s cluster support, and why?” came up. I had no idea how to answer the latter. I thought maybe it’s related to the subnet mask of k3s (e.g., 10.42.0.x or /8), and that the number of hosts might be 2^24 or something, but I’m not confident.

What is traefik? They asked me. I said api gateway as I had read that in Apress book intro page. I blabbered it was something for SSL termination, reverse proxy, api gateway etc.

I am unable to have clarity on things I am working.

I want to improve and understand these concepts deeply. I’ve started investing entire time(I quitted my job) in learning computer science foundations like networking and operating systems, but I’m unsure if I’m studying the right materials to finally grasp DevOps concepts or if I’m just reading irrelevant stuff.

*So my questions to the HN community are:* - What are the founding principles of microservices and containerization, especially regarding containerization vs virtualization?

- How should I think about the OS in containers vs VMs?

- How do I reason about cluster capacity (e.g., number of pods/deployments) in Kubernetes or k3s?

- What foundational knowledge should I focus on to truly understand DevOps and container orchestration?

I’d appreciate any guidance, resources, or explanations that can help me move from confusion to clarity. Thanks in advance!
by anonnon | 2025-08-31 09:42:59+00:00
Maybe the left should have offered genuine concessions on immigration and border security when they had the chance. E.g., support the construction of a wall without expecting anything like "comprehensive immigration reform" (read: amnesty) in return. Instead you dragged your feet at every opportunity, even as the entire world made a mockery of our immigration laws:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NyssZRWaMWg

Trump's second term, with his sledgehammer approach, is the natural result.
by zeta0134 | 2025-08-31 09:43:40+00:00
Never in those 20 years did I need one on Windows either. It turns out if you vet the software you install in the first place, malware is pretty rare. That isn't the bar for most regular users of software though.

Working in retail tech support, we got folks bringing in their new macbooks, freshly ruined by new ransomware, utterly baffled that it was possible at all. But when you're trying to use Photoshop without paying... well, shady stuff's still out there.
by another_twist | 2025-08-31 09:45:22+00:00
My thoughts exactly. Most of my coding is actually writing the tests or coming up with a proper harness to check behaviour of the code. Then of course there's other stuff like operations playbook if you are introducing new infrastructure. I have usually worked in environments where ops, q/a, design, code was the full job. First time I worked with explicit SREs it was a bit weird to give people specific commands to run without an overview of the system.
by OneDeuxTriSeiGo | 2025-08-31 09:45:46+00:00
An appview is really just a service for hydrating content in the skeleton of posts that feeds return back to give to the user.

The only things they do other than feed hydration are track notifications, (optionally) provide a search engine, (optionally) provide a CDN, and (temporarily until E2EE rolls out) handle DMs.

So you can actually do things like the Red Dwarf [1] project which is a bluesky client without an appview. It's slower, you visibly notice request loading/pop-in, there's no notifications, and no search but it works with any other bluesky appview (since appviews are basically a lens into atproto rather than an independent service).

--------

If you wanted to run your own infrastructure, instead you'd probably want to run your own PDS. Running an appview has its benefits of course but the main way you "self host" is to run a PDS. That's fairly trivial and people have run them on all kinds of constrained hardware (including a literal jailbroken microwave if I remember correctly).

1. https://tangled.sh/@whey.party/red-dwarf
by rcxdude | 2025-08-31 09:46:31+00:00
The problem with your wish is that's you're kinda getting it in some cases, and it's a bit of a monkey paw. Hardware vendors are increasingly creating systems that abstract away the underlying hardware from the OS (usually by writing their own software on some other core that really drives the hardware), but the problem is they're generally closed, buggy, and leaky, and so the OS stops really being the OS of the system and instead you have a collection of barely-related subsystems that it's really difficult to get to work together effectively, and way more security holes than you can shake a stick at. (Oh, and they're usually only ever tested against one particular OS and so they're not actually particularly portable)
by defanor | 2025-08-31 09:47:32+00:00
> You would feel the need to look up a variable called isSecure, but would not need to look up condition4 or condition5?

I assume that those "conditions" are placeholders, not to be read literally in the example (since the example is not about poorly named variables, but about complex conditions), so I did not mean them literally, either. Supposedly those would be more informative names, such as "channel_encrypted", "checksum_verified".

> [...] describe wishful thinking by straight-up lying

This was what I had in mind upon seeing that "isSecure" bit, too: could easily be a lie (or understood differently by different people). But taking a little more effort to check then, and/or having to remember what those variables actually mean. It is a commonly debatable topic though, where the good balance is, similarly to splitting code into small functions: people tend to balance between spaghetti code and extreme splitting.

My point though is not to argue with those particular points here, but that we have no such practices/rules universally considered simple and formally stated/verifiable.
by simianparrot | 2025-08-31 09:48:14+00:00
It is a prime example for why most of European politics are shifting rightwards. And I'm not saying that's a good thing, overall, it simply is the reason. Far too many who've immigrated here have the GP's viewpoint, and the conflict seems inevitable since our elected representatives have acted paralyzed for decades on this issue.

And I personally fear where this is going. Because as much as I want to vet immigrants much more thoroughly and for a time hopefully have net-negative immigration in my country's case, I also know so many immigrants who came here to blend with our culture and are fantastic fellow countrymen. They've enriched our country and culture. When our representatives let it get as bad as it's getting, the ensuing conflict is one that I fear will end up harming indiscriminately, based on ethnicity and simple identifiable markers. All because spineless bureaucrats would rather not put their neck on the line, instead opting to let it all slide into the historically inevitable ugly conflict that seems looming.

I am actively looking into non-European destinations to emigrate to, and only ones where I feel I can be a net-positive on their culture and contribute to their economy and society. Because if my worst-case scenario for Europe comes to pass, I don't want to be here to be dragged into it. I don't want to be a contributor in that ugliness.
by throw310822 | 2025-08-31 09:48:30+00:00
> So can you please tell me what control Israel exerted?

Haha, no. The international community, international organisations and law experts have already established the consensus that Gaza was still under occupation. If you have a problem with this, it's a problem between you and, well, reality- I'm not wasting my time discussing it here.

> As was tried word for word in Gaza

No. I said "retreat within the 1967 borders"- did Israel retreat within the 1967 borders? No. It still occupies the West Bank and Gaza, expanding illegal settlements in the West bank, occupying East Jerusalem, implementing apartheid, periodically bombing Gaza and killing, displacing, imprisoning people in the West Bank.

> While the occupied part of Palestine is relatively peaceful

No. Dated September 2023:

"2023 marks deadliest year on record for children in the occupied West Bank"

"At least 38 Palestinian children have been killed by Israeli forces in the occupied West Bank so far in 2023, making it the deadliest year since records began, said Save the Children."

https://reliefweb.int/report/occupied-palestinian-territory/...

And this is- the murder of children- just the tip of the iceberg.
by danabramov | 2025-08-31 09:48:50+00:00
https://whtwnd.com/futur.blue/3ls7sbvpsqc2w

Edit: I think the author’s server may be busted or something. The link should be correct though. I’ll ping them. The announcement is at https://bsky.app/profile/futur.blue/post/3lsc2tzfsys2f
by YeGoblynQueenne | 2025-08-31 09:48:50+00:00
Note that you're not "saving somebody's life" by donating a kidney. What you are doing, at best, is increasing their quality of life and even that is hard to quantify:

Having a kidney transplant does not “cure” kidney disease. There are also risks, including the risks of surgery. After the transplant, you will need to take anti-rejection medicines, also called immunosuppressants, for as long as your new kidney is working, which can have side effects. You will have a higher risk for infections and certain types of cancer.

Although most transplants are successful and last for many years, how long they last can vary from one person to the next. Depending on your age, many people will need more than one kidney transplant during a lifetime.

https://www.kidney.org/kidney-topics/kidney-transplant

The majority of kidney patients with end-stage kidney disease do not simply die: they can survive several years on dialysis. As far as I can tell, most indeed do: only a minority of kidney patients ever get transplants.

Source: relative with kidney disease who would not accept a living donour kidney because of ethical concerns.