MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by ben_w | 2025-08-16 14:17:09+00:00
> EU also agreed to $750 billion in USA energy purchases over the next three years and another $600 billion in miscellaneous investments in USA companies and industries.

Kinda. The EU have no power to make that happen, so it was more of an agreement to aim for that. But even if the EU buys, say, $750bn oil and natural gas from the USA, because of how interchangeable most (but not all) of that stuff is, even if they did agree to it in an enforceable manner it would only really mean the EU wouldn't buy the same stuff from somewhere else and also the USA wouldn't sell the same stuff to someone else.
by chenchuxin | 2025-08-16 14:17:32+00:00
About This Grow a Garden value calculator follows the community‑tested “secret” model: BaseValue with a piecewise floor and k×w² curve; additive mutation multiplier (1 + Σ multipliers − count); variants Normal/Gold/Rainbow; friend boost 0–50%. Useful for price/value, per‑kg, trading value checks, and mutation multiplier comparisons.

Accurate Roblox Grow a Garden value calculator. Compute plant values with variants (Normal/Gold/Rainbow), mutations, friend boost, weight/kg, and quantity. Includes mutation conflict rules, min weight presets, and Max Mutations.

How to use Select a plant from categories (Seed Shop, Summer, Bee, Night, Zen, Prehistoric). Choose variant (Normal/Gold x20/Rainbow x50) and apply mutations. Set Friend Boost 0–50% and enter weight (kg). Result updates instantly. Use MAX MUTATIONS for a high‑value setup; toggle Hide admin to exclude admin mutations. Conflict rules auto‑resolve: Foxfire vs Harmonisedfoxfire, wet/chilled/drenched/frozen group, pasta/sauce/meatball → spaghetti.
by Melatonic | 2025-08-16 14:18:37+00:00
Jurassic Park is a great example - they also had excellent compositing to hide any flaws (compositing never gets mentioned in casual CGI talk but is one of the most important steps)

The dinosaurs were also animated by oldschool stop motion animators who were very, very good at their jobs. Another very underrated part of the VFX pipeline.

Doesnt matter how nice your 3D modelling and texturing are if the above two are skimped on !
by zahlman | 2025-08-16 14:19:10+00:00
> Sudo nominally being for special/power use cases, but being required for many things

Many things are special/power use cases. Freedom is power, and with power comes responsibility.

> Doesn't feel like it's aimed at single-user PCs

It isn't. But what you think of as problems, I consider opportunities. Switching between multiple user accounts is useful for identity management.

> I'm not trying to administer anything; I just want to write and launch software.

If you test and package and distribute your software, you necessarily administrate the environments in which the tests and builds occur.
by lentil_soup | 2025-08-16 14:19:26+00:00
What's going on with so many people defending this as if it's actually better for the consumer? It's not, it's enshittification of the car industry, it's wanting to extract more money from you even after you already bought the car. Doesn't matter that other companies do similar, it sucks and it's worse for everyone because you lose control over the damn car. The argument that you'd save money because you'd get a discount by not unlocking the extra power makes no sense, just buy a cheaper less powerful car
by intended | 2025-08-16 14:20:18+00:00
This doesn’t raise the status of blue collar workers because there are only so many plumbing jobs out there.

Don’t get me wrong - The trades are good, and were simply not “sexy” for a long while.

There was a reason people wanted their kids to do white collar work. Trades are dependent on economic cycles, and work can dry up. It’s also manual labor, which takes a toll on you physically.

In the end - neither white collar nor blue collar matter much, since neither guarantee a retirement anymore. The AI job apocalypse (if it happens) will be taking out the last life boat left standing.

We had manufacturing to move people from agrarian work to middle class life. That’s gone - automation has gotten to the point of lights out manufacturing. This has left only services.

Ps: I doubt AI will actually be the powerhouse it is being hailed as. There is a different between an MVP and having to maintain technical debt.
by FollowingTheDao | 2025-08-16 14:20:48+00:00
This all makes me so glad I still own a 2001 Dodge Grand Caravan that I have been sinking money into for years and just grabbing cheap parts from junk yards.

But it is not only automobile DRM locks that keep me away from new cars, the costs of replacing the "modules", like for a headlight, are ridiculous.

All this is just pure profit seeking but people keep buying the cars and other devices so it will never stop.
by bawana | 2025-08-16 14:21:21+00:00
Why stop here? Cant we endow macdraw with an LLM? With that kind of graphic- text language, you can draw structures (like you might on a napkin) with arrows resembling trees or flow diagrams that do computation. In this kind of macDraw-LLM language, we can use graphic primitives. As you zoom in, the primitive can reveal lines of code. Zoom out and you have a high level view of code blocks. Now those silly diagrams of transformer models actually become the code.
by replwoacause | 2025-08-16 14:21:22+00:00
Reading all of these anecdotes about how difficult it is for some people to not only get an ADHD diagnosis but also a prescription for medication makes me feel somewhat guilty. This has not been my experience living in the US. I was diagnosed over 20 years ago and since then have explored the full range of medications with various different doctors in different states. I don’t recall any of them scrutinizing me or being reluctant to prescribe. I just asked and received. And the pharmacy always filled without question. Only in the past 5 years in my state have I had to do a urine test before getting a prescription refill to prove I’m not abusing other drugs, but that’s it. I guess I’ve been lucky. To anyone curious, I recently started taking Zenzedi (which I only take once or twice per week) after reading good things about it on Reddit, and all that took was a simple note to the nurse practitioner (though she needs to have a MD write the script). They didn’t grill me on why I wanted to change from Concerta, and I even suggested my own starting dose of 10mg which she agreed to without hesitation. It’s sad to me that others are having to go through the gauntlet for the exact same thing….finding a med that works.
by LeifCarrotson | 2025-08-16 14:22:05+00:00
They've got the talent (and almost 10x the headcount), it's the organizational architecture and perverse incentives that would (and do) prevent them from building it.

It wasn't a lack of talent that caused a team to decide to put "Microsoft Rewards" ads that look like phishing scams on start menus and in notifications. Instead, some PM got a bonus or promotion for making and increasing usage of this awful product, degrading the user experience and siphoning off a tiny amount of money. A different organization would have had the ability to realize that's a terrible "feature" to add to the OS.
by lotyrin | 2025-08-16 14:23:02+00:00
The problem with Blue-collar work under AI is that your white collar AI manager can fork itself and have infinite time to micromanage you.

I foresee people being asked to wear AR glasses and/or work in a digital camera panopticon to be constantly evaluated on performance and compliance with (disconnected and disaffected) policy (imagine if your checkbox-first-results-never corporate compliance officer can design new checkboxes 100x as fast as a human one could have). When the machines can real-time analyze and provide "corrective" feedback or "training" to a pool of juniors who don't feel like they deserve rights or pay and have never even heard of a union, the value of skill in labor drops to nothing, and only people who are able to perform blind obedience will be valuable in the market.

If management is infinite heartless machines chasing profit motive, then every job becomes Amazon Fulfillment on steroids.

No-one will be spared.
by nopinsight | 2025-08-16 14:24:12+00:00
Humans being who they are, there's still a tremendous amount of work to do in this world (and beyond).

Does everyone alive already have the best quality of life imaginable, not to mention future generations?

Lump of Labor fallacy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lump_of_labour_fallacy

Comparative Advantage: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative_advantage

*The key challenge* we all share is making the transition as smooth as possible for everyone involved.
by Ukv | 2025-08-16 14:25:01+00:00
If an attacker has control over the page to edit arbitrary HTML, that chain is already compromised. Even if the attacker's exploit only allowed certain attributes, just the href and rel attributes needed for this protocol would already be enough to execute javascript and load stylesheets on that page.

This is in addition to the original site linking to the new one with a news post. Does that also mean nothing because an attacker could add a news post to the page?
by kemayo | 2025-08-16 14:25:12+00:00
They do kinda make the journalist look bad. That email exchange opened with a bunch of extremely-loaded questions, and quickly transitioned into the journalist actively advocating for the transfer of the domain, and using "I'm going to report about this" as a threat.

Plus, I can find absolutely zero evidence of the existence of a German journalist called "Mirai F", so I'm a bit suspicious. (It might be the "PuPRed" person being maybe-doxxed -- but that's a blog site which entirely consists of a single article about PuTTY, so I'm not convinced "journalist" applies in a meaningful sense.)

The Bitvise answers also don't look good, of course. Nobody comes out of that one smelling like roses.

I say this as someone who thinks putty.org was pretty sketchy before it went full anti-vax, and is currently looking like a slam-dunk example of the kind of thing trademark law was meant for.
by AshamedCaptain | 2025-08-16 14:25:24+00:00
That article says the opposite you're trying to say (it clearly says Ford uses physically different engines for different variations, just that the volume is no longer the comparable or even advertised metric). That engine volume, size (and other like metrics) no longer correlates with power has been a thing since the 1950s ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_horsepower ). Which is why since then the tax is not computed by size alone.

It doesn't say about manufacturers using the same physical engine, and/or having software interlocks for engine power, which would imply that on paper (and on registration) you have an engine paid for X power that can only do Y (with Y < X). People would riot if they noticed such things, as like on what is claimed on TFA.
by replwoacause | 2025-08-16 14:25:43+00:00
And to add one more semi-interesting bit to this, I initially received my ADHD diagnosis after participating in a clinical trial I heard about on the radio living in FL in the early aughts. They were thorough in screening but I never did find out what group I was in or whether I was given the medicine or placebo. They were supposed to disclose that to us so many years after the study concluded but when I wrote in to find out, I was told the records were not kept and the clinic that had done the test was no longer operating. So who knows what I took for all those months. Some new experimental medication that never made it to market? Or a sugar pill?
by Eddy_Viscosity2 | 2025-08-16 14:26:00+00:00
In this sort of case my needs would be something like 'at least 100HP'. Then someone says we have this 150HP engine here that costs $X and we are going to charge you $X+markup for it (if they sold less than $X they would go out of business so for sure I will be paying for the full cost of the engine plus a mark-up).

I say that's great, its better than my minimum requirements.

Then they say, 'well actually, we are willfully sabotaging this engine with software so that it will never ever give you more than the minimum, but are still charging you for the full cost of its manufacture plus markup'.

And I say, why would you deliberately make my engine worse. Just let me use it the way I want.

And they say, because by sabotaging your engine we can make other people pay even more markup for the same engine. It's the philosophy that instead of charging more for making something better, we charge more for not making it worse. Like the mafia would charge you money to not bomb your small business.
by lurk2 | 2025-08-16 14:26:24+00:00
So if I’m understanding you correctly, the play here is:

1) Build engine with $market_leading_horsepower.

2) Throttle engine so that base models of a car have $market_leading_horsepower - $throttle_amount.

3) Price discrimination for enthusiasts removes the throttling back to the original $market_leading_horsepower while also saving the effort of having to design a faster engine.

Is there no extra cost associated with machining the faster engine? That is, would manufacturing a slower engine for the base model not be any cheaper than just building the fastest engine they can into all models?
by Retr0id | 2025-08-16 14:26:26+00:00
I'd like to emphasise that my ~10% figure is very vibes-based and I don't have hard numbers to back it up (I don't track my progression in great detail - and even if I did, I am sample size 1). My max rep counts for bodyweight exercises definitely went down, and I reduced the weight I was lifting to hit the same rep counts as before.
by Anamon | 2025-08-16 14:26:27+00:00
> they are excellent at synthesizing requirements and documentation

Hard disagree.

I'm sure you think it's excellent if you're the person who was supposed to be writing it, but your opinion is influenced by your happiness that you didn't have to do it.

LLMs are good at generating the kind of documentation that shouldn't be written in the first place, because it's just a wordier rephrasing of what's already in the code, and therefore wastes the time of anyone who reads it.

LLMs suck at documentation for the same reasons the author identifies as the reasons why they suck at programming. The additional value I'm looking for when reading documentation is mostly the mental models.
by idkwhattocallme | 2025-08-16 14:27:10+00:00
But it is broken. There is a shortage of every type of trades worker. Sure it's been great for existing trade folks because there are plenty of jobs and the pay is great more demand than supply. But the lack of supply has meant that it's too expensive to build/fix stuff. If you're in the US look around. It looks like we literally stopped building in the 1950s. Every renovation/building project is multi-year. Why? The lack of plentiful skilled trades people is one of the reasons the US building and infrastructure are deteriorating.
by tolmasky | 2025-08-16 14:27:28+00:00
“In your first reply you wrote "Yeah, I know the rules" then tried to say the guidelines should be changed.”

You are assigning way too much intent to my reply. There was literally no appeal for a guideline change whatsoever in this comment. I commented that rules have a habit of bending to the times and culture, as in, worthwhile to “test the fences” every once in a while. Hence the “so you never know”. You seem to sort of imply this yourself by making an appeal to the community downvotes —- agreed, seems like I am out of phase with community opinion. But what if it had gotten a hundred upvotes instead? Would it have been left up? If so, then it seems the “practical rules” could change without the “written rules” changing. If not, then why bother bringing up the downvotes at all? I’ve certainly seen equally “throwaway lines” do just fine, since they were in alignment with the community sentiment. Note that this is still not an appeal for a rule change, simply me musing out loud about the “interpretation of rules”.

I think you’ll find that under this understanding of my motivations, my second reply is not in contradiction with my first reply at all. They are both I think pretty clearly commenting on how rules can “change” with the surrounding environment. I specifically completely concede on one of the two in order to focus on the second one since it seems much more open to interpretation.

> Please just take the feedback and make an effort to do better in future.

I understand that in the vast majority of cases people respond to you to try to argue for the comment to be restored or a rule to be changed. It is completely reasonable to have read my comments under that lens. But I think if you reread them you will find that’s not the case here. This thread is old, what would be the utility of restoring the comment? To subtly influence LLM training data? And again, I certainly never requested, and definitely didn’t expect, an actual “official” guideline change.

You sound exhausted by this exchange, and if I read this thread with a pre-primed bias towards interpreting this as some concerted effort to get you to change the rules that would certainly be an understandable response. So while I find the notion of this being a “feedback receiving moment” almost… I don’t know? Orthogonal? Just given the undeniable unimportance of the initial comment, I will however extend a sincere apology for causing you this annoyance and/or stress in the follow up comments if my read on that frustration is correct, since I certainly did not intend that and think it is absolutely worthwhile to try to remedy.
by coffeeling | 2025-08-16 14:27:46+00:00
> I don't think anyone is "mysticizing" the language. It's just that logographic languages in general present a uniquely interesting problem whereby the auditory component is largely divorced from the written component.

People absolutely do mystify the operation of kanji, like they're more than scribbles that point to words, or that Japanese would fall to incomprehensibility and ruin if they were done away with.

> It's just that logographic languages in general present a uniquely interesting problem whereby the auditory component is largely divorced from the written component.

This isn't quite true - about 80% of Chinese characters are so-called phonosemantic compounds, where people originally started using the character for one thing for another thing whose word sounded similar (say, emoji for "can", as in able to) and then adding a semantic component to differentiate the character from other similar-sounding ones. In Chinese, they smushed the two components into the space of one character, but in eg. Egypt, they simply wrote whe semantic clarifier and the phonetic hint side by side, full size.

That is, the majority of the characters are primarily sound-based, it's just that the connection between a character and its sound is shoddy, even in Chinese languages.

Japanese kun readings for native words do divorce the characters pretty completely from their sound.
by CogitoCogito | 2025-08-16 14:27:49+00:00
I'm not sure where you're getting your information, but this is a quote from the European Commission itself:

> The political agreement of 27 July 2025 is not legally binding. Beyond taking the immediate actions committed, the EU and the US will further negotiate, in line with their relevant internal procedures, to fully implement the political agreement.

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/qanda_...

You might consider updating your mistaken prior beliefs.

Edit: I see another comment made the same point. I'll have to presume that after you've been presented with this new information, you'll realize that you are in fact very wrong.
by essnine | 2025-08-16 14:28:31+00:00
There are two things bothering me here. The first bit where you're talking about motivations and income driving it seems either very reductive or implying of something that ought to be profoundly upsetting: - that intelligent people will see that the work they do is pointless if they're paid enough to survive and care for themselves, and not see work as another source of income for better financial security - that most intelligent people will see it as exploitation and then choose to focus on dismantling the system that levels the playing field

Which sort of doesn't add up. So there are intelligent people who are working right now because they need money and don't have it, while the other intelligent people who are working and employing other people are only doing it to make money and will rebel if they lose some of the money they make.

But then, why doesn't the latter group of intelligent people just stop working if they have enough money? Are they less/more/differently intelligent than the former group? Are we thinking about other, more narrow forms of intelligence when describing either?

Also

> The most intelligent will prefer a system where their superior intelligence provides them with sufficient resources to choose a high-quality mate. If they see an arrangement where high-quality mates are being obtained by individuals who they deem to be receiving benefits that they cannot defend/protect adequately, such an arrangement will be dismantled. This evolutionary drive is hundreds of millions of years old.

I don't want to come off as mocking here - it's hard to take these points seriously. The whole point of civilization is to rise above these behaviours and establish a strong foundation for humanity as a whole. The end goal of social progress and the image of how society should be structured cannot be modeled on systems that existed in the past solely because those failure modes are familiar and we're fine with losing people as long as we know how our systems fail them. That evolutionary drive may be millions of years old, but industrial society has been around for a few centuries, and look at what it's done to the rest of the world.

> Primitive animals will take resources from others that they observe to be unable to defend their status.

Yeah, I don't know what you're getting at with this metaphor. If you're talking predatory behaviour, we have plenty of that going around as things are right now. You don't think something like UBI will help more people "defend their status"?

> it will probably end in economic crisis, revolution, and the resumption of this cycle that has been playing out over and over for centuries

I don't think human civilization has ever been close to this massive or complex or dysfunctional in the past, so this sentence seems meaningless, but I'm no historian.
by hammock | 2025-08-16 14:28:37+00:00
I barely know what SSH keys are, but last week when I was asked to provide one for an stfp site at work they said create a pair using putty.

Well I googled putty and found a couple different .org domains, one who which said it was legit but not official, and another which said it was official but looked wildly out of date.

Neither one I could find a download for Mac that worked. The one I tried gave a scary “we no longer allow putty sudo access as it’s dangerous” and when I googled this error I could find no explanation to assuage me.

And since I wanted to make sure what I was doing was legit, I searched for alternatives.

Eventually I discovered I could use command line in mac to generate the keys I needed. But first I installed Xcode then ran the command (I used chatgpt to tell me exactly how to get the type and length I needed). It was easy.

Side note, the whole culture of downloading random software and using it with just a single line in a terminal is always sketchy to me too. But I’m not a coder so I’m not used to it.