MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by c-hendricks | 2025-09-24 01:46:16+00:00
Oof, I'm outside my edit window and didn't make my correct point. It's when people say "I was banned from _____ for _____". When people say "for _____" I take their word with a huge grain of salt.

Not even much to do with Reddit, it's something I picked up from playing video games: https://speculosity.wordpress.com/2014/07/28/the-lyte-smite/
by danparsonson | 2025-09-24 01:46:30+00:00
OK and if you said something that you later realised to be wrong, would you be contradicting yourself by correcting it? What should they have done in this situation? People do make mistakes, speak out of turn, say the wrong thing sometimes; I don't think we should criticise someone in that position who subsequently fixes their error. And within a couple of days in this case! That's a good thing. They screwed up and then fixed it. What am I missing here?
by AfterHIA | 2025-09-24 01:47:07+00:00
Let's say that in the future that the dominant form of entertainment is X-rated animal snuff films for whatever reason. Would a lack of alternative content constitute an attack on your right to choose freely or speak? Given your ethical framework I'd have to say, "no" but even as your discursive opponent I would have to admit that if you as a person are adverse to, "X-rated furry smut" that I would sympathize with you as the oppressed if it meant your ability to live and communicate has been stifled or called into question. Oppression has many forms and many names. The Johnny Conservatarians want to reserve certain categories of cruelty as, "necessary" or, "permissable" by creating frameworks like, "everything is permitted just as long as some social condition is met..."

At the crux of things the libertarians and the non-psychos are just having a debate on when it's fair game to be unethical or cruel to others in the name of extending human freedom and human dignity. We've fallen so far from the tree.
by bmurphy1976 | 2025-09-24 01:47:11+00:00
I'm really digging Ghosty's shaders. It finally feels like a gimmicky terminal done right. Want a Fallout or CRT theme without compromising on other features? You can finally have it. It brings back memories of the early days of Linux when everything was fun and not trying to mimic the most bland OS out there. Think Enlightenment before everything got gnomified.
by stinkbeetle | 2025-09-24 01:47:12+00:00
I think it would be even wiser to start by holding to account the politicians, corporations, and government institutions regarding their unchecked lies corruption and fraud.

But no, yet again the blame is all piled on to the little people. Yes, it's us plebs lying on the internet who are the cause of all these problems and therefore we must be censored. For the greater good.

I have an alternative idea, let's first imprison or execute (with due process) politicians, CEOs, generals, heads of intelligence and other agencies and regulators, those found to have engaged in corrupt behavior, lied to the public, committed fraud, insider trading, fabricated evidence to support invading other countries, engage in undeclared wars, ordered extrajudicial executions, colluded with foreign governments to hack elections, tax evasion, etc. Then after we try that out for a while and if it has not improved things, then we could try ratcheting up the censorship of plebs. Now one might argue that would be a violation of the rights of those people to take such measures against them, but that is a sacrifice I'm willing to make. Since We Are All In This Together™, they would be willing to make that sacrifice too. And really, if they have nothing to hide then they have nothing to fear.

When you get people like Zuckerberg lying to congress, it's pretty difficult to swallow the propaganda claiming that it's Joe Smith the unemployed plumber from West Virginia sharing "dangerous memes" with his 12 friends on Facebook that is one of the most pressing concerns.
by kace91 | 2025-09-24 01:47:16+00:00
As a backend dev (mostly working in fintech) I feel weirdly unable to find a target language to move to.

After working with Node and Ruby for a while I really miss a static type system. - Typescript was limited by its option to allow non strictness.

Nothing catches my eye, as it’s either Java/.Net and its enterprisey companies or Go, which might not be old but feels like it is, by design. Rust sounds fun, but its usecases don’t align much with my background.

Any advice?
by ZYbCRq22HbJ2y7 | 2025-09-24 01:47:57+00:00
> Tbh the vast majority of players never made it to act 3

You seem to comment with generalizations a lot.

Here is some data:

https://steamcommunity.com/stats/1086940/achievements

"The City Awaits (40.3%)"

So 59.7% of all players didn't make it to Act 3 on Steam, a bit under a "vast majority".
by queenkjuul | 2025-09-24 01:48:47+00:00
My manager has Claude leave a two-page worthless comment on every single PR we submit, uses copilot to write 20-line "summaries" of 5-line changesets, and once sent my coworker and I a Claude-generated document that was so unclear in its purpose that we both replied "what even is this" after which the manager just ghosted the slack thread and pretended it never even happened.

I'm looking for a new job.
by mac-attack | 2025-09-24 01:48:47+00:00
The issues you are bringing up don't highlight that they stuck with the wrong decision, but rather that they didn't pivot to the right decision as fast as you'd like... yet your solution is bottom-up decision-making that will undoubtedly take much much longer to reach a consensus? How do you square that circle?

Experts can study and learn from their prior mistakes. Continually doing bottom-up when we have experts is inefficient and short-sighted, no? Surely you would streamline part of the process and end up in the pre-Trump framework yet again?

Also, I'm curious why you have such a rosy picture of the bottom-up alternatives? Are you forgetting about the ivermectin overdoses? 17,000 deaths related to hydroxychloroquine? The US president suggesting people drinking bleach? It is easy to cherry pick the mistakes that science makes while overlooking the noise and misinformation that worms its way into less-informed/less-educated thinkers when non-experts are given the reins
by JdeBP | 2025-09-24 01:49:27+00:00
To expand on the other replies: There are two very different tasks here.

This library would be for the task of taking a received ECMA-48 character stream and turning that into a series of actions on some sort of model of a terminal's display, keyboard, and mouse.

You are looking at a library for the (roughly) inverse task of taking a model of UI widgets and turning that into a transmitted ECMA-48 character stream.

Here's an example of the former:

* https://github.com/jdebp/nosh/blob/trunk/source/ECMA48Decode...

* https://github.com/jdebp/nosh/blob/trunk/source/SoftTerm.h

Here's an example of the latter:

* https://github.com/jdebp/nosh/blob/trunk/source/ECMA48Output...

* https://github.com/jdebp/nosh/blob/trunk/source/TUIDisplayCo...

* https://github.com/jdebp/nosh/blob/trunk/source/TUIVIO.h

* https://github.com/jdebp/nosh/blob/trunk/source/TUIVIOWidget...
by ants_everywhere | 2025-09-24 01:50:44+00:00
I'm not confused, and an abacus is a digital computer.

You keep referring to what we are interested in, but that's not a relevant quantity here.

A symbol is a discrete sign that has some sort of symbol table (explicit or not) describing the mapping of the sign to the intended interpretation. An analog computer often directly solves the physical problem (e.g. an ODE) by building a device whose behavior is governed by that ODE. That is, it solves the ODE by just applying the laws of physics directly to the world.

If your claim is that analog computers are symbolic but the same physical process is not merely because we are "interested in" the result then I don't agree. And you'd also be committed to saying proteins are symbolic if we build an analog computer that runs on DNA and proteins. In which case it seems like they become always symbolic if we're always interested in life as computation.
by typeofhuman | 2025-09-24 01:50:46+00:00
If you're referring to Jimmy Kimmel. You should probably consider that while the FCC member made that comment, Sinclair (the largest ABC affiliate group) and others had been demanding ABC cancel his show for its horrible ratings, and awful rhetoric which inhibited them from selling advertising. His show was bad for business. It's worth suspecting ABC let no good opportunity go to waste: save Kimmel's reputation and scapegoat the termination as political.

More here: https://sbgi.net/sinclair-says-kimmel-suspension-is-not-enou...
by NaOH | 2025-09-24 01:50:57+00:00
Some numbers: A typical MLB game sees about 292 pitches thrown. Of the pitches called a ball or strike—so ignore any pitches fouled off or put in play—93% are called correctly by umpires. That's equivalent to umpires missing a call every 3.6 batter appearances.

So in terms of volume, this isn't much. In terms of potential effects, it becomes a question of how well players utilize their teams' two challenges (teams retain challenges if they correctly use them, but only the batter, the catcher, and the pitcher can request a challenge).

It all becomes an interesting question in terms of strategies. A catcher when he's batting? Does he want to risk one of his team's challenges as a batter that he might want for his pitcher? A mediocre hitter in a low-stakes situation? Does he want to risk one of his team's challenges? What about a really good hitter in a low-stakes situation? Lots here for teams to consider, and since it's up to the players to decide on a challenge (not managers or coaches), teams will have to determine their approaches such that players can make decisions without assistance.
by johncolanduoni | 2025-09-24 01:51:19+00:00
> BTW, this scenario isn't so hypothetical for me, as I work on the Java platform, and I very much prefer spending my time on trying to reduce injection vulnerabilities in Java than on chasing down memory-safety-related vulnerabilities in HotSpot (because there's more security value to our users in the former than in the latter).

That's a good example and I agree with you there. I think the difference with V8 though is twofold:

1. Nobody runs fully untrusted code on HotSpot today and expects it to stop anybody from doing anything. For browser JavaScript engines, of course the expectation is that the engine (and the browser built on it) are highly resistant to software sandbox escapes. A HotSpot RCE that requires a code construction nobody would actually write is usually unexploitable - if you can control the code the JVM runs, you already own the process. A JavaScript sandbox escape is in most cases a valuable part of an exploit chain for the browser.

2. Even with Google's leverage on the JS and web standardization processes, they have very limited ability to ship user-visible security features and get them adopted. Trusted Types, which could take a big chunk out of very common XSS vulnerabilities and wasn't really controversial, was implemented in Safari 5 years after Chrome shipped it. Firefox still doesn't support it. Let's be super optimistic and say that after another 5 years it'll be as common as CSP is today - that's ten years to provide a broad security benefit.

These are of course special aspects of V8's security environment, but having a mountain of memory safe code you can tweak on top of your unsafe code like the JVM has is also unusual. The main reason I'd be unlikely to reach for Zig + temporal pointer auth on something I work on is that I don't write a lot of programs that can't be done in a normie GC-based memory safe programming language, but for which having to debug UAF and data race bugs (even if they crash cleanly!) is a suitable tradeoff for the Rust -> Zig drop in language complexity.
by mattwilsonn888 | 2025-09-24 01:52:02+00:00
Your earlier point that languages exist that are safer than Rust but not less ergonomic is irrelevant - that's the point I made.

One can fail, or artificially make a language less ergonomic and that doesn't mean that fixing that somehow has an effect on the safety tradeoff.

So obviously it is when safety and ergonomics are each already maximized that pushing one or the other results in a tradeoff. It's like saying removing weight from a car isn't a tradeoff because the weight was bricks in the trunk.

Anyways I was holding performance constant in all of this because the underlying assumption of Rust and Zig and Odin and C is that performance will make no sacrifices.
by zenmac | 2025-09-24 01:53:01+00:00
And Python got popular cause of LLM AI thing. It is a shame, cause it is quite slow. I had some good time with jython back in the 2 days, but really wished something more elegant (nim/rust/ocaml) has taken over this AI thing instead of python.

One thing is for sure, don't get tight down to one language cause it is popular today. Go with whatever make sense for you and your project.
by datadrivenangel | 2025-09-24 01:53:14+00:00
You are correct that it is possible to use MCP securely. Like if you build a custom client, and only use trusted third party servers one at a time.

But the hype-promise of "AI" is that you can make the commercial off the shelf ClaudeGPT client magically discover MCP servers and automate everything. And if the majority of people's expectations require vulnerability, you're going to have a bad time.
by nomel | 2025-09-24 01:53:25+00:00
> Time has shown that is the case for most germ lines.

This is true, but that sure seems unfair. ;) You have multiple competing systems, in the case of a germ. The system that human related germs are competing with is around 30 trillion times the size, with the advantage of some fairly incredible emergent properties that come from that. The germ is evolving, but in a system that completely overwhelms it, with evolved tricks to specifically force the germ along the "unhappy path" of evolution.
by bradgessler | 2025-09-24 01:53:38+00:00
There’s a lack of transparency playing out compounded by a poor job rolling out would should be the equivalent of boring corporate security bureaucracy.

Usually when this kind of stuff is rolled out, it’s agreed upon in some form and documented. Then when people are surprised, it’s a matter of pointing to the section in the doc that’s relevant and everybody goes on their way.

From the outside it appears this had none of that, so people are understandably surprised, sad, or angry. Since there’s a lack of transparency, people are filling in the blanks.
by pornel | 2025-09-24 01:54:07+00:00
It's hard to find good data sources for this, especially that StackOverflow is in decline[1].

IEEE's methodology[2] is sensible given what's possible, but the data sources are all flawed in some ways (that don't necessarily cancel each other out). The number of search results reported by Google is the most volatile indirect proxy signal. Search results include everything mentioning the query, without promising it being a fair representation of 2025. People using a language rarely refer to it literally as the "X programming language", and it's a stretch to count all publicity as a "top language" publicity.

TIOBE uses this method too, and has the audacity to display it as a popularity with two decimal places, but their historical data shows that the "popularity" of C has dropped by half over two years, and then doubled next year. Meanwhile, C didn't budge at all. This method has a +/- 50% error margin.

[1]: https://redmonk.com/rstephens/2023/12/14/language-rankings-u... [2]: https://spectrum.ieee.org/top-programming-languages-methodol...
by derbOac | 2025-09-24 01:54:59+00:00
I appreciate the rigor being asked for in this article, but I wonder sometimes if the typical clinical trial data will go far enough.

"Someone is depressed, is randomly assigned to a therabot, decreases more in a measure of depression than controls, therabot is approved."

But what about longer term effects? What is someone learning or not learning about social relationships? There's an old adage that getting people with agoraphobia to therapy is part of the therapy — so what if someone interacting with a real human would be a lesson in lessening social anxiety or whatever?

I guess sometimes I worry that the protocol - driven nature of modern medicine will spill over into therabots and leave a lot of more complex issues on the table unaddressed.
by ggm | 2025-09-24 01:56:15+00:00
Without over-doing it, as a non-american, not resident in the USA, It is so very tempting to say "a problem of your making" -but in truth, we all have a slice of this because the tendency to conduct state policy by mis-truths in the media is all-pervasive.

So yes. This is a problem rooted in the USA. But it is still a problem, and it's a problem for everyone, everywhere, all the time.
by kjs3 | 2025-09-24 01:57:03+00:00
Regrettably, any discussion of Fortran will be quickly filled with people who once had to write a couple of F77 programs in college and never got over it, never used a really nice Fortran compiler, and of the very few who actually knew the language has evolved in the last 50 years the vast majority of that minority couldn't name a single significant thing that changed in F90/F95 through Fortran 2018.

But they all have Opinions, which they are compelled to share.
by stinkbeetle | 2025-09-24 01:57:26+00:00
When you're a global organization who is pushing for the censorship of any dissent or questioning of your proclamations, it's really on you not to say one thing one day then the opposite the next day, isn't it? They could have taken some care to make sure their data and analysis was sound before making these kinds of statements.

If you posted to YouTube that it is very rare for asymptomatics to spread the disease, would you be banned? What if you posted it on the 9th in the hours between checking their latest guidance and their guidance changing? What if you posted it on the 8th but failed to remove it by the 10th?

What if you disagreed with their guidance they gave on the 8th and posted something explaining your stance? Would you still get banned if your heresy went unnoticed by YouTube's censors until the 10th at which time it now aligns with WHO's new position? Banned not for spreading misinformation, but for daring to question the secular high priests?
by earthdeity | 2025-09-24 01:57:38+00:00
You can go to any number of sites (here's a nice one https://webencrypt.org/openpgpjs/), and encrypt a message. You can exchange public keys over any text channel. You can then send encrypted messages over that text channel. Anyone who really needs to send encrypted messages, trivially can. Of course, many criminals won't, but should we all sacrifice our privacy for such a pathetic measure of security?
by AtlasBarfed | 2025-09-24 01:57:39+00:00
Given how mediocre LLMs are, I don't see this happening anytime soon... but I think a "better" LLM (that puts the "language" into large language model) can seamlessly translate between programming languages.

Right now, it's apparent to me that LLMs are mostly tuned in the programming space for what n-gate would call "webshit", but I think it is a clear (to me) evolutionary step towards getting much better "porting" ability in LLMs.

I don't think that is in the priority list of the LLM companies. But I think it would be a real economic boon: certainly there is a backlog of code/systems that needs to be "modernized" in enterprises, so there is a market.

Ultimately I wonder if an LLM can be engineered to represent code in an intermediate form that is language-independent to a large extent, and "render" it to the desired language/platform when requested.
by typeofhuman | 2025-09-24 01:57:55+00:00
> Also, spreading disinformation about covid has real-world implications.

Your logic can be used to censor anything that goes against the narratives of the arbiters of disinformation.

> Orange man getting his feelings hurt because comedian said something isn't even in the same ballpark

Pejorative. Lack of evidence. Ignoring contradictory evidence. Sounds like you are locked in.
by cultofmetatron | 2025-09-24 01:57:59+00:00
My point is that the coverage I received in highschool civics WAS one sided in which jews were shown as heroes fighting to create a country against all odds and all the countries around it wanted to destroy them because they were jews.

The very institutions that we created to educate them against propaganda have themselves been used to instill propaganda. In this case, the very real islamaphobia and dehumanization of arabs that runs at the core of american culture.
by AfterHIA | 2025-09-24 02:00:32+00:00
I know that your post is rhetorical but I'll extend your thinking into real life-- has andy99 personal webpage been created because you're an elected official representing others? Would this still give andy99 the right to distribute hate speech on his personal webpage? I think we can harmonize around, "unfortunately so" and that's why I think the way forward is concentrating on the, "unfortunately" and not the, "so."

We have the right to do a potentially limitless amount of unbecoming, cruel, and oppressive things to our fellow man. We also have the potential for forming and proliferating societies. We invented religion and agriculture out of dirt and need. Let us choose Nazarenes, Jeffersons, and Socrates' over Neros, Alexanders, and Napoleons. This didn't use to be politically controversial!
by array_key_first | 2025-09-24 02:01:02+00:00
They can, but it really depends on the belief. Even for you or the most principled person, there is a limit.

And, even if you can, it doesn't mean it's pleasant.

Its one thing if someone is horrible in silent. From experience, horrible people seem to be the most confident and outspoken. Maybe there's a common character flaw that underpins both behaviors.
by fluoridation | 2025-09-24 02:01:05+00:00
You're assigning a rigidity to these terms that they simply don't have. A "console", in the oldest sense of the term, is any place where a user interfaces with a computer, or more broadly with any kind of machine.

>Borrowed from French console (“bracket”, noun), from consoler (“to console, to comfort”, verb). Sense of “bracket” either due to a bracket alleviating the load, or due to brackets being decorated with the Christian figure of a consolateur (“consoler”), itself perhaps a pun on the first sense (alleviating load). Originally used for the bracket itself, then for wall-mounted tables (mounted with a bracket), then for free-standing tables placed against a wall. Use for control system dates at least to 1880s for an “organ console”; use for electrical or electronic control systems dates at least to 1930s in radio, television, and system control, particularly as “mixer console” or “control console”, attached to an equipment rack.

A "terminal" is a text-only console. For a long time, "terminal" and "console" were synonymous. By metaphor, in the same way that a "desktop" is not a desktop, referring to a terminal emulator as a console is perfectly acceptable, and everyone will understand what is meant.
by solid_fuel | 2025-09-24 02:01:31+00:00
The NSA doesn't use a bunch of SIM cards on wire racks.

If the NSA needs outbound phone numbers, they're more likely to set up a shell company and pretend to be an MVNO or a VOIP telco provider, a couple computers on a cheap cloud host masquerading as a phone provider is a lot easier to manage and hide than a setup like this. This is a pretty common kind of business so it's easy enough to blend in, and it isn't restricted to a single apartment or city.

If the NSA wants to eavesdrop on phone calls, they just set up a room inside the relevant phone provider [0].

I think this is more likely a gang operation or a foreign influence operation. Details are thin but it feels like a shady organized crime operation (think quasi-legal, probably advertising as bottom-rate VOIP numbers or text gateways) that got used at one point by a foreign influence operation to make threats and try to interfere in domestic politics.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Room_641A