MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by tialaramex | 2025-08-02 22:57:30+00:00
This is a footgun. A language should strive not to add footguns. Every footgun you provide, somebody is going to blow their foot off with it, so that's a high price. If your language is popular it might be a lot of somebodies.

The opposite behaviour (we have a constant regular expression, we re-use it often but the tooling doesn't realise and so it's created each time we mention it) is not a footgun, it results in poor performance, and so you might want (especially in some managed languages) to just magically optimise this case, but if not you won't cause mysterious bugs. An expert, asked "Why is this slow?" can just fix it - you have to supply basic tools for that, but this flag is not a sensible tool.
by cosmic_cheese | 2025-08-02 22:58:59+00:00
In the 90s I was taught to read via phonics. Context was mentioned further down the road as a tool to reach for when one understands all but one word in a sentence, in which case context can be used to infer the meaning of the mystery word sometimes (but not always).

I can’t imagine not having a functional knowledge of phonics. That must make long unfamiliar words daunting and reading overall more scary than it needs to be.
by layer8 | 2025-08-02 22:59:24+00:00
A normal inverted T is what is on a standard desktop PC keyboard: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8c/Arrow_ke...

While half-height arrow keys have become common on laptops, that's probably not what GP (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44769440) meant by "normal".

ThinkPads generally use slightly smaller keys for the arrow keys, but still significantly taller than half-height, like for example here: https://p3-ofp.static.pub/ShareResource/560x450/SSNP/4Y40X49...

What people really want is a full-height inverted T like on this Lenovo gaming laptop: https://p1-ofp.static.pub//fes/cms/2025/05/21/uft1eixrszoryp...
by tpae | 2025-08-02 22:59:58+00:00
Location: Los Angeles, CA

Remote: Yes

Willing to relocate: No

Technologies: React, TypeScript, Next.js, SwiftUI, GraphQL, Node.js, OpenAI APIs, RAG, LLM agents, macOS/iOS dev

Résumé/CV: Available upon request

Email: t@k0.io

Staff-level engineer (15+ yrs) with experience across FAANG and startups. I specialize in shipping polished UIs fast, integrating AI features (LLMs, agents, RAG), and designing user-first tools. Previously led frontend/product at an acquired no-code platform (100K+ users), built an Apple-featured app solo, and currently building AI-native desktop companions.

Seeking freelance/contract work only — early product, creative tools, or AI interfaces preferred.
by simoncion | 2025-08-02 23:00:18+00:00
I think it is true... at least on Linux. I am pretty sure that if my firewall didn't have this line in the filter table

-A INPUT -i wan-interface -m conntrack --ctstate RELATED,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT

along with this line in the nat table (or the equivalent with the SNAT target if you have a static WAN IP)

-A POSTROUTING -o wan-interface -j MASQUERADE

then IPv4 NAT simply wouldn't work... well, not the NAT that nearly all regular folks have on their home networks.

It is true that without the firewall's involvement the router would drop all traffic destined to the LAN. [0] But it's the decisions made in the firewall that both make the NAT work, and ensure that WAN traffic that hasn't been requested stays out.

[0] Unless the router were "excitingly" misconfigured!
by RhysU | 2025-08-02 23:00:24+00:00
> But for your typical spark application, you have one main writer (the spark driver) appending or merging a large number of records...

The multi-writer architecture can't be proven scalable because a single writer doesn't cause it to fall over.

I have caused issues by using 500 concurrent writers on embarrassingly parallel workloads. I have watched people choose sharding schemes to accommodate Iceberg's metadata throughput NOT the natural/logical sharding of the underlying data.

Last I half-knew (so check me), Spark may have done some funky stuff to workaround the Iceberg shortcomings. That is useless if you're not using Spark. If scalability of the architecture requires a funky client in one language and a cooperative backend, we might as well be sticking HDF5 on Lustre. HDF5 on Lustre never fell over for me in the 1000+ embarrassingly parallel concurrent writer use case (massive HPC turbulence restart files with 32K concurrent writers per https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/6799149 )
by b112 | 2025-08-02 23:00:34+00:00
And that would also validate control of the same address at some point.

One thing to bear in mind is that it could have been a contractor who worked for the FBI. Someone at an external firm hired to do the job. Or just a tech at the FBI.

The FBI would still be liable, but would also potentially point their ire at the thief and criminal who did so, under contract.

A law firm might pro-bono the detective work, to see just who spent that coin, if anyone did.
by dragonwriter | 2025-08-02 23:00:45+00:00
So, if the technical end of this really works, whoever controls the venue and its records can control what videos (real or fake) are considered “real”, in the rare circumstances where the kind of forensics needed to verify it would be employed.

Unfortunately, in most of the cases where that would be useful, that's also a party pretty high on the list of “who are we concerned about manipulating video”, so...
by throw0101d | 2025-08-02 23:01:20+00:00
See perhaps "Reaction of IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration (SLAAC) to Flash-Renumbering Events":

* https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8978

And "Improving the Reaction of Customer Edge Routers to IPv6 Renumbering Events":

* https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc9096

Also maybe "IPv6 Multihoming without Network Address Translation":

* https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc7157

Lots of good presentation at the IETF meeting for the 6man and 6ops WGs.
by Aurornis | 2025-08-02 23:02:02+00:00
> You seem very intent (here, and in the loneliness thread) on projecting your own experiences as the baseline on which things should be evaluated.

I was pointing out that you don’t know what you’re talking about.

You cannot conclude that a truck never goes off-road by observing them on city streets. That was your claim, and I explained why it didn’t make sense. I also explained why trucks are not primarily sold as off-road vehicles anyway.

> It is a known fact that the vast majority of truck owners rarely ever use the truck bed

If you read the “studies” that make these claims they use two tricks:

First, they specifically exclude a truck defined as a work truck.

Second, they redefine “using the bed” to some arbitrary threshold, like hauling a large load of loose dirt or hauling something over so many hundred pounds.

If you actually believe that truck owners aren’t putting anything in the truck bed, you’re out of touch.

But why does this one point trigger you so much? If I showed you a similar study that the majority of people with back seats rarely had more than 2 people in their cars, would you become similarly enraged at the people buying 5-seat cars instead of a compact 2-seater?

If I showed you a study that the majority of people rarely use more than 200 horsepower would you start getting triggered by all of the 300, 400, or even 500 horsepower cars so wastefully driving around?

There’s something about pickup trucks, specifically, that makes a vocal minority irrationally angry and triggered. It’s a funny meme to watch because so many comments in this thread are absolutely sure that they understand the situation but they don’t understand basic facts about how you can’t tell if someone goes off-road by judging the condition of their paint, or that using a truck for work purposes doesn’t render it visibly damaged in a way that they can see. They just see trucks, get triggered, mix it with misleading “studies”, and come to believe odd conclusions like “truck drivers don’t use their beds”
by movingontonext | 2025-08-02 23:02:42+00:00
Canadian here. This may be true for some (many) parts of Canada but certainly not all of Canada. For example, with proper gear you can run outdoors in Vancouver year-round. When I lived in the GTA, I routinely ran outdoors through late December and almost always resumed by mid-March.

Point being: dressing appropriately can extend your running season dramatically.
by fsflover | 2025-08-02 23:03:38+00:00
> Think powering it off helps? Try again. Unless you physically remove the battery (good luck with that), your device still pings quietly in the background.

My phone has physical kill switches for the modem, WiFi+Bluetooth, camera+mic (and all three together kill all sensors). So whenever I need privacy I have it, while still being able to connect at will. There is no reason to completely avoid cell phones, as the article suggests.
by PaulDavisThe1st | 2025-08-02 23:03:55+00:00
You know people who regularly say on a weekend evening "Sorry, I can't come, I need to put the $34 I'd have spent into my HSA" ?

It's not really about safety nets since most people don't discount (or account) for them (they're in the future). It's about disposable income, and for huge numbers of Americans, that's in short supply due to the exorbitant cost of housing, college education and health insurance & care.
by atleastoptimal | 2025-08-02 23:04:14+00:00
The thing is, AI researchers have continually underestimated the pace of AI progress

https://80000hours.org/2025/03/when-do-experts-expect-agi-to...

>One way to reduce selection effects is to look at a wider group of AI researchers than those working on AGI directly, including in academia. This is what Katja Grace did with a survey of thousands of recent AI publication authors.

>In 2022, they thought AI wouldn’t be able to write simple Python code until around 2027.

>In 2023, they reduced that to 2025, but AI could maybe already meet that condition in 2023 (and definitely by 2024).

>Most of their other estimates declined significantly between 2023 and 2022.

>The median estimate for achieving ‘high-level machine intelligence’ shortened by 13 years.

Basically every median timeline estimate has shrunk like clockwork every year. Back in 2021 people thought it wouldn't be until 2040 or so when AI models could look at a photo and give a human-level textual description of its contents. I think is reasonable to expect that the pace of "prediction error" won't change significantly since it's been on a straight downward trend over the past 4 years, and if it continues as such, AGI around 2028-2030 is a median estimate.
by queSide | 2025-08-02 23:04:30+00:00
I do get that solving the general case would cost a huge amount of resources, especially policing people with an axe to grind against a particular company. Is saying Carte blanche too far? perhaps. Maybe better phrasing would be "Rules are written with good intentions and enforced when the general case is solved". Regardless, I think this discussion has run it's course, I got to warn others. Thanks for your time
by Aurornis | 2025-08-02 23:05:53+00:00
The hauling figure is useless without specifying what they mean.

Usually these “studies” redefine hauling to mean something specific like hauling loose dirt or something extremely heavy.

If you can read a quote claiming 2/3 of truck owners don’t “put something in the bed” more than once a year then and not realize that something is wrong with these statistics then you’re missing something.
by jemmyw | 2025-08-02 23:05:55+00:00
I don't think moderation has anything to do with it and it's not the core of the argument in the article. They've taken a huge valuation and investors will want a return on that. The problem is that there's just not that much loyalty in this space. I don't care where the content is hosted as long as it's not annoying, content makers don't care so long as they can make money. When substack starts needing to extract value they have to do it in a way that's annoying and chances are high we see the next platform appear. We've seen it before.

It would be lovely to see a platform get big taking a sustainable approach. But that investment money buys marketing and hype.
by daniel-grigg | 2025-08-02 23:06:18+00:00
I don’t know about curing loneliness but when I wrote our bot for doing code reviews I was quite thrown back by how positive and sympathetic the feedback was compared to my peers. It felt like my bot human than us humans!

Was it fake? Sure. I mean I instructed it to praise good changes after all. But it still felt good.

And now I’m noticing another effect, my human peers have started mimicking some its behaviours.
by casenmgreen | 2025-08-02 23:06:37+00:00
In the UK, with the NHS, it seems the focus of the NHS became management, rather than clinical care. One example I read of stuck with me; a superb nurse, who ran her ward extremely well, had to leave clinical nursing because as a career path, it was a dead end. She had to move into management, and her former ward descended into chaos.

NHS budget has last I knew increased many times over since 1948, but the bed count went from about 450k down to about 100k - and those numbers were from more than ten years ago.

A theory is presented to explain this, which is that the more money you put in, the more management you get, and the more management you get, the less time clinical staff have for clinical work; more money results in less clinical output - but more managerial output, which theory argues is the primary focus and product of NHS.
by DaveZale | 2025-08-02 23:06:38+00:00
that's a good perspective, but I gave up on social media years ago. The bots on reddit cancelled me for harmless comments, for example. On something like X, it seems like pay to play.

Do you agree that censorship on these topics is peculiar to the US media? Seems like that to me.

I agree with your observation about the recursion, at least in the US media - the word choice that outlets use can soften the emotional impact even of something like genocide, it seems.
by Aurornis | 2025-08-02 23:08:06+00:00
There’s a quote from some consulting firm that goes around claiming 2/3 of truck drivers don’t “put something in the bed” more than once a year.

It’s a laughable claim for anyone who thinks about it for more than a second.

The way they usually get to these numbers is by redefining what “hauling a load” means to be something extremely heavy or for loose fill materials. So if someone routinely hauls a couple mountain bikes in the bed of their truck or gets a few 2x4s from the lumber yard it wouldn’t count.
by deathanatos | 2025-08-02 23:08:12+00:00
My point is you're still doing all that.

Let's say instead of downloading API keys, everyone on the Internet permits uploading a public key to represent a service. Now it's: Visit our website. Create an account. Verify your email. Create a project. Add your credit card. Go to settings. Upload an API pubkey. Download our SDK. Import it.

All of that seems unchanged by using a pubkey to represent programmatic access.

(And as a sibling comment more constructively notes, you might be able to combine pubkeys, so, "Add it to your password manager. Drop it in your .env file. […] Pass your env var in.", but potentially only once. So we can omit that part here, I suppose.)
by skissane | 2025-08-02 23:08:59+00:00
I’m sympathetic to your overall point - I’m not a convinced Georgist but I’m open-minded about the idea - but I’d question some of your specific examples

> even domain names,

With an alternative DNS root, you can have any domain name you like, except for legal constraints such as trademarks, defamation, obscenity, etc. The problem is none of the alternative roots ever took off, in part because the browser vendors didn’t want to get on-board (they saw it as a high risk low reward feature)-and alternative browsers offering that feature failed in the market. This really isn’t comparable to land, in that the scarcity isn’t imposed by the laws of nature or laws written by government, it is scarcity entailed by a (predominantly) private social arrangement where competing arrangements are permitted, but have thus far failed in the market.

> the orbitals in the sky

Orbit is huge and while it is getting more congested, I don’t think that congestion is (as yet) a significant barrier to new entrants. The primary barrier remains the launch costs. The governments of major spacefaring powers don’t see orbital slots as a revenue source, their regulation of them is purely about avoiding conflict, and the fees they charge are about recovering the cost of that regulation, not contributing to general revenue. Some equatorial states tried to claim geostationary orbit slots over their territory as part of their territory, in order to charge for access to them - but the claim failed because the major spacefaring states refused to accept it, and these states lacked the geopolitical power to compel anyone else to take this claim seriously-and, anyway, with the growth of LEO constellations, geostationary orbit arguably isn’t as economically important as it was when those claims were first asserted
by simoncion | 2025-08-02 23:09:30+00:00
> Still, I get your point - there's compromises in all technologies...

That's not my point. My point is that there are well-made devices that are substantially better than average, and poorly-made devices that are substantially worse than average.

People seem to think that OLED automatically means instant switching times and no color smearing... well, that all depends on how the panel is made and driven.

> The Nexus 5 is 12 years old...

Ah, crap. I meant to say "Pixel 5a". I do that all the damn time. I do wish they'd never changed the name.

> I'd suggest comparing technologies applied in monitors that aren't teenagers.

Fun fact #1: The Pixel 5a was released three years ago.

Fun fact #2: The OLED version of the Nexus S (now fifteen years old) had no smearing. It was a beautiful display. Its only problem was that it burned in the top status bar within a year or so of use.

Tech improvement isn't a ratchet. (If it were, we'd not have had that it-sure-as-hell-seemed-like-five year period where pretty much the only LCD screens you could get were "high definition" 1080p TN displays!)
by dkh | 2025-08-02 23:09:36+00:00
No, prejudice is bad, full stop. By definition it means to judge someone for something before you actually know for sure that they have/do the thing that bothers you. It doesn’t matter what the thing is, that’s not the problem or the point. The point is you can’t, or shouldn’t, view or treat someone as though they have some quality you dislike when you don’t actually know about this individual and only know that a high percentage of them do. You can’t judge an individual this way! If you hate waste (as do I) and you feel trucks contribute to that and that a majority of truck owners don’t make use of their trucks, then great! Speak about it exactly like that. But you can’t simply take any truck driver and say “that individual is wasteful” without knowing.

You can’t do that any more than you can assume my friends and I are criminals and drug dealers because at some point we decided to use Telegram as our primary messaging app, or like ICE can assume anyone standing near a pro-Mexico protest is an illegal immigrant, you cannot attribute a quality to an individual without having actual knowledge of it.
by SkyPuncher | 2025-08-02 23:10:10+00:00
I now own a truck. I’m actually regretting not getting a bigger/heavier duty one. The biggest limitation is payload capacity. Payload is anything that puts weight on the vehicle - occupants, dogs, gear, food, supplies, bed covers/caps, etc. You must legally be under payload capacity or you can risk fines or liability in an accident. A lot of people are willing to push these limits, but cops pay a lot more attention to people towing/hauling.

If you want to actually tow with your truck, you need to allot a good portion of your payload to trailer weight (and hitches) that rests on the truck (tongue weight). This can range from 200lbs to 1k+ lbs, but is typically in the 500 to 600lb range for something like a boat or travel trailer. It can easily go higher if you load the trailer up with stuff.

A typical light duty truck might have 1500 lbs of payload capacity. Four people and their belongings can easily add up to 800lbs. Add pets, bikes, travel gear, food, etc and your suddenly well over 1k lbs of payload. You literally have no capacity to tow anything but the smallest of trailers.

So what do you do, well you get a bigger truck. You don’t need it all of the time, but it just doesn’t make sense to own a vehicle that cannot legally handle a family road trip.

Before people say “rent”. That comes with its own major set of issues. The biggest being little to no ability to tow with a rental vehicle. Most rentals flat out prohibit towing (even if technically capable and equipped). Those that do allow towing, generally limit it to 1st party trailers (U-Haul truck can only tow u-haul trailer).
by vkou | 2025-08-02 23:11:19+00:00
Sanders and AOC are fringe socialists who hold no power in either the press, or the political establishment.

MAGAnuts are now the mainstream face, body, and soul of the political establishment.

Where exactly is the 'center' between the latter and Chuck Schumer? Where is that 'center' going to be in three years, as every month, MAGA picks up the goalposts and moves them a few miles right-wards?
by AnthonyMouse | 2025-08-02 23:11:32+00:00
> When something is large and light, the consumer view is that it is cheaply made.

That depends on the context. If it also looks cheap and squeaks when you pick it up, the impression is that it's made of junk plastic rather than the wrought iron and solid gold presumably being used by the competition.

Whereas if you can give the feel that the thing is from the future with titanium alloys and carbon fiber (even if it's really still just aluminum and plastic), people get a different impression.
by Aurornis | 2025-08-02 23:11:50+00:00
The average fuel economy for cars on the road right now is around 25mpg.

You can also get a 40-50mpg brand new sedan here if you want, but they serve different purposes.

You can also get a hybrid F150 that gets better mileage.

You can also get a fully electric F150 that doesn’t use any gas at all.

I was trying to make a point to counter the silly assumptions throughout this thread, such as the person who keeps claiming trucks are “incompetent” at being normal vehicles.
by mayanksab | 2025-08-02 23:12:20+00:00
Location: Melbourne, Australia Remote: Yes Willing to relocate: Yes Technologies:UX/Product Design, Phython, User flow, Surveys, AI bots, Generative AI, Marcom Collaterls Résumé/CV:https://drive.google.com/file/d/18_VkEqlLg-EJsyJ4zORamNKBNLP... Website: https://itsmayank.com/ Email: mayank@itsmayank.com
by staticman2 | 2025-08-02 23:12:47+00:00
>>There is no provision of copyright law that limits terms of contracts covering AI outputs.

This isn't how legal reasoning works in a common law system... to discover the answer you usually find the most similar case to the current fact pattern and then compare it to the current issue.

If you are aware of such a case, even colluqually, point me in the right direction. It might be hard to analogize to another cases though, because Anthropic doesn't have a license for most of the training materials that made their model. I've also read you can't contract around a fair use defense.

If I'm wrong it isn't very helpful to shout "na uh" without further explanation. Give me some search engine keywords and I'll look up whatever you point me towards.