MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by codingdave | 2025-09-08 10:53:13+00:00
The HN API is not efficient - it says so itself in its readme. Which means neither is this. Making 1000+ HTTP requests to dupe check feels kind of insane when all you are doing is URL comparisons.

Why not instead make a single call to: https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=whateverdomain.com, and parse that single result?
by malfist | 2025-09-08 10:54:16+00:00
I remember playing MUDs in high school because my system admin blocked all online games, but didn't block telnet. I credit it with my high speed typing and finally getting better than 50/50 at spelling. I'm towards the later part of my thirties. Just checked out their website and they still seem to be alive and well. Don't even require telnet anymore, lots of browser or desktop apps to do what a telnet terminal did
by jay-barronville | 2025-09-08 10:54:24+00:00
I think that both of you are right to some extent.

It’s undeniable that humans exhibit stochastic traits, but we’re obviously not stochastic processes in the same sense as LLMs and the like. We have agency, error-correction, and learning mechanisms that make us far more reliable.

In practice, humans (especially experts) have an apparent determinism despite all of the randomness involved (both internally and externally) in many of our actions.
by Epixors | 2025-09-08 10:55:44+00:00
Location: Porto, Portugal

Remote: Yes

Willing to relocate: No

Technologies: TypeScript (NestJS, Express) | Rust | PHP | Redis | ClickHouse | Terraform | GitHub Actions | AWS | Linux (primarily Ubuntu)

Résumé/CV: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1RobsfSJArgFS5ZPp-uG7hBXBXLP...

Email: klaas-janboon@live.nl
by worldsayshi | 2025-09-08 10:55:56+00:00
I agree. Linters are one of the more frustrating aspects of modern dev. It's of such little relevance and yet it takes up a sizeable portion of my time when I'm going for a merge. Many editors/language combinations don't give automatic linting out of the box and when they do I can bet that the rules they infer is different from what the CI pipeline infers.
by dmsweetser | 2025-09-08 10:56:09+00:00
Safe Trader is an advanced, automated trading bot designed to manage your cryptocurrency investments on Coinbase. It uses a proprietary algorithm to execute buy and sell orders based on real-time market conditions, historical price trends, and algorithm-defined risk parameters.

Key Features:

Automated Trading 24/7: Continuously monitors and trades assets, even when you're offline. Dynamic Portfolio Diversification: Automatically balances your portfolio by evaluating and trading a wide range of assets, while respecting your excluded assets list. Real-Time Market Analysis: Uses historical averages and current price data to make informed trading decisions. Profit Optimization: Sells assets that are consistently estimated to be profitable, and buys assets when their price dips below a configurable threshold. Precision Trading: Adjusts order precision dynamically to maximize success rates and minimize errors. Transparent Reporting: Provides detailed transaction history, profit/loss estimates, and real-time balance updates. Safe Trader is designed to maximize profits while minimizing risks, using a disciplined and data-driven approach.
by citrin_ru | 2025-09-08 10:57:20+00:00
glibc malloc still doesn't work well for multi-threaded apps. It is prone to memory fragmentation which causes excessive memory usage. One can reduce number of arenas using MALLOC_ARENA_MAX environment variable and in many cases it's a good idea but it could increase lock contention.

If you care about efficiency of a multi-threaded app you should use jemalloc (sadly no longer maintained but still works well), mi-malloc or tcmalloc.
by TuringTest | 2025-09-08 10:59:32+00:00
If you have to handle specific behavior for the new method in an existing type, of course you will need to add a new implementation of the method for that type.

As I understand the Expression problem, the limitation of programming languages is that they force you to modify the previous existing types even if the new behavior is a generic method that works the same for all types, so it should be enough to define it once for all classes. A virtual method in the base class should be able to do that.
by d4rkp4ttern | 2025-09-08 10:59:32+00:00
> using these tools as a massive force multiplier…

Even before tools like CC it was the case that LLMs enabled venturing into projects/areas that would be intimidating otherwise. But Claude-Code (and codex-cli as of late) has made this massively more true.

For example I recently used CC to do a significant upgrade of the Langroid LLM-Agent framework from Pydantic V1 to V2, something I would not have dared to attempt before CC:

https://github.com/langroid/langroid/releases/tag/0.59.0

I also created nice collapsible html logs [2] for agent interactions and tool-calls, inspired by @badlogic/Zechner’s Claude-trace [3] (which incidentally is a fantastic tool!).

[2] https://github.com/langroid/langroid/releases/tag/0.57.0

[3] https://github.com/badlogic/lemmy/tree/main/apps/claude-trac...

And added a DSL to specify agentic task termination conditions based on event-sequence patterns:

https://langroid.github.io/langroid/notes/task-termination/

Needless to say, the docs are also made with significant CC assistance.
by krapp | 2025-09-08 10:59:56+00:00
I mean, we're supposed to care? We're here on a forum of programmers and technical people ostensibly gathered because we want to satisfy our intellectual and technical curiosity.

Hacker News is already full of people too misanthropic and uncurious to engage with topics beyond the title. Now we don't even care about the art and science of programming. So why bother showing up? This place will be nothing but shitposting bots and self-promotion soon.
by xpe | 2025-09-08 11:00:17+00:00
I suggest rephrasing as a series of question:

1. Assuming at least one person who cares about linter settings isn't utterly confused or moronic, what are their self-described reasons why they care? People's work styles, brains, and even sensory perception differ in some important ways!

2. As freedom-loving developers [1] who want to make our own choices to help our own styles of work, why should we even have to care about "enforcing" one standard for something that isn't really necessary? This one-standard-per-project thing is a downstream result of a design decision upstream (storing source code as plain text).

3. How should we design languages going forward? This brings the conversation back to top-level post (which is why we're here -- to think about what languages could be, not to rehash tired old debates, after all): how can we take what we've learned and build better languages -- perhaps ones where the primary source of truth for source code is not plain text?

[1] Slightly tongue-in-cheek. It is one thing to want to have freedom to do our jobs well, it is another thing to turn this into advocacy an overarching system such as a political philosophy or various decentralized financial mechanisms and so on. Here, I'm merely referring to the "let me do my job in the way that actually works for my brain" sense.
by henearkr | 2025-09-08 11:00:21+00:00
Hmm, the thing is that the hostage justice system does have a deterrent effect.

Its net effect is that you absolutely do not want to have anything to do with the police to help solve your problems in the society (true problems, not merely e.g. asking for directions). And then you really want to avoid problems at all.

So, you cannot think of them as "friendly useful workers to help solve problems", because they are heavily incentivized and biased to find or invent crimes if you give them the opportunity.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but police interviews are recorded in the US?

And also, you always have the right to an attorney? (that's not the case in Japan except if you want to stay 20 days incarcerated while waiting for an attorney, all for a tiny minor dismeanor).
by account42 | 2025-09-08 11:00:21+00:00
> With saving, I usually add a confirmation directly next to the save button, so the save button itself doesn't change state (people often like pressing save multiple times!).

There is no problem with the button changing states as long as it only happens after the current document state was successfully saved and becomes active again when you make changes to the document. That way the button doesn't represent the outcome of some action but the sate of the document - unsaved changes = button enabled, no unsaved changes = button disabled.
by myrmidon | 2025-09-08 11:00:38+00:00
> But I also think there are positive ways of celebrating your culture.

I think you're right, I was being too prohibitive.

When people start to reduce their own identity (and their judgement of others) to just one dimension is where the actually dangerous territory starts, but it is a very easy position to end up in sadly (even right after being on the receiving end).
by DonHopkins | 2025-09-08 11:01:20+00:00
This is good, and objectively better than letting the random unbounded length of the function name define and inflate and randomize the indentation. It also makes it easier to use long descriptive function names without fucking up the indentation.

setup_spi(&adc, mode=SPI_01, rate=15, cs_control=CS_MUXED, cs=0x01 ); setup_spoo(&adc, mode=SPI_01, rate=15, cs_control=CS_MUXED, cs=0x01 ); setup_s(&adc, mode=SPI_01, rate=15, cs_control=CS_MUXED, cs=0x01 ); validate_and_register_spi_spoo_s(&adc, mode=SPI_01, rate=15, cs_control=CS_MUXED, cs=0x01 );
by pelagicAustral | 2025-09-08 11:01:48+00:00
I know this is besides the point, incredibly petty and borderline psychotic, but... if you can fill your medium cup with the amount of a large one, wouldn't that mean that the store is the one cheating on you? The way this is playing in my head is: I grab the medium cup, try to outsmart the universe and pour a large into it, coffee overflows in my hand, and I watch justice being served as my hand gets burn and I cannot scream because that would denounce my scam.
by johnisgood | 2025-09-08 11:02:24+00:00
> taking too much will generally be because of a chemical dependence, not a conscious choice.

This is an oversimplification and not universally true, but I do not wish to get into the details of it and addiction in general. We could brush away every decisions based on "chemical imbalances", too, if we so want. :)

> we should prefer opiates over ibuprofen/acetaminophen when the latter will do the job

Yes, after a careful risk assessment. If you are likely to get ulcers, or a stroke, or any cardiovascular events from NSAIDs, then you might want to consider something safer. Tylenol would be safer in this case, but what if that does not help with the pain at all? In any case, I do not necessarily disagree, and I was not advocating for blind consumption of opioids. If Tylenol works, take it with milk thistle (with high silybilin content) and you will be fine, even if you take it on the daily.
by Helmut10001 | 2025-09-08 11:02:35+00:00
More recently, I find ChatGPT to become increasingly unreliable. It makes up almost every second answer, forgets context, or is just downright wrong. Maybe I am used these days more and more to dump huge texts for context into the prompt, as aistudio allows me. Maybe ChatGPT isn't as good as with such information. Gemini/Aistudio will stay on track even with 300k tokens consumed, it just needs a little nudge here and there.
by Tade0 | 2025-09-08 11:03:08+00:00
If self-checkout stores[0] are a measure of being such a place: Ageing of society. I've read last year's statistics about my country's criminality and two things stand out:

1. It's half what it was 20 years ago.

2. The largest group of perpetrators are people in their mid 30s, not 17-20yo like it was two decades ago and they focus on online fraud, not actually going places to commit crimes.

[0] Specifically corner shops with a self-checkout machine and just one person behind the non-self checkout counter who wouldn't be able to react anyway should anyone leave with the goods.
by mrweasel | 2025-09-08 11:03:55+00:00
Standing in line at McDonalds, to pick up an online order, made me think that maybe the drive thru isn't that great of an idea during rush hours. The staff needs to handle orders in a very specific sequence, to get the cars moving, meaning that they'll need to priorities drive thru orders. Wolt/DoorDash impose the same problem to an extend. I've notice that orders from in restaurant customers is frequently seems to be de-prioritized to get the drive thru line moving or to get the deliveries out.

It provides an awful experience for other customers, and the drive thru is still going to be slowed down, if someone has a weird or large order, because they frequently can't move that customer to the side, so now everyone has to wait.
by alexey-salmin | 2025-09-08 11:04:02+00:00
30 years ago it wasn't dark ages. Wikipedia didn't exist but books on probability theory and statistics did.

When you do a shuffling algorithm in a sensitive context (money or security), you have prove that it returns all the possible permutations with equal probability plus put lower bounds on the amount of entropy you need from the underlying RNG. If you're unable to prove it, you shouldn't move forward with the algorithm. Any irregularities in the output distribution can be exploited. This is textbook knowledge pioneered in early encryption works and perfected by the time WWII ended. Evidently the effort to prove correctness was never made.

Now the original article can indeed misrepresent or omit important facts. I'm definitely open to reconsider my conclusion if more facts become available. However "there was no Wikipedia" isn't one of them, it doesn't count as an excuse not to do your job properly.

If it turned out, for example, that "ASF Software" wasn't even aware that their shuffling algorithm was used to shuffle cards and just shipped it along with 200 other basic algorithms as a some sort of "better standard library", this would change the situation. However from the quick googling it seems that their product wasn't a standard library, it was specifically software for Texas Hold'em. This is a "you had one job" kind of situation.

> Since then, people have continued to expose severe RNG design flaws in other systems designed by very smart people. It happens...

Absolutely, but we're not talking frontiers of Computer Science here.

* If you seed your RNG with at most 86 million unique values, you get at most 86 million unique random sequences out of it.

* If your code should have M possible equiprobable outcomes, it has N equiprobable outcomes, and N doesn't divide M, you're in trouble.
by Alifatisk | 2025-09-08 11:04:49+00:00
A feature I haven't seen someone comment about yet is Project Battlematrix [1][2] with these cards, this allows for multi-GPU AI orchestration. A feature Nvidia offers for enterprise AI workloads (Run:ai), but Intel is bringing this to consumers

1. https://youtu.be/iM58i3prTIU?si=JnErLQSHpxU-DlPP&t=225

2. https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/developer/articles/t...
by xpe | 2025-09-08 11:04:58+00:00
> Yeah in theory people can do a better job than auto-formatters. In practice they absolutely do not, so that argument is moot.

Status quo fallacy alert. Arguments are not forever mired in a current state of affairs. People can learn and can build tools to help them do better.

This could change quickly; e.g. if Claude or GitHub or (Your Team) decide to prioritize how source code looks.
by IshKebab | 2025-09-08 11:05:42+00:00
clang-format is probably the worst of the autoformatters. They tried to get fancy with a sort of global optimisation algorithm but in practice it's buggier and uglier than the classic Prettier algorithm which is elegant and generally works very well. It's also way less diff friendly.

I wouldn't draw any conclusions about autoformatters from clang-format.
by riehwvfbk | 2025-09-08 11:06:18+00:00
It doesn't matter to these people. They are so drunk on their feelings of superiority that they'll dismiss anyone with first-hand experience as an "apologist", a "foreigner" or whatever. They need to perform these mental gymnastics because they've been told all their life that "liberal democracy" is perfect, and anyone who challenges this notion is somehow deficient. To even consider a different point of view would bring their entire worldview crashing down, and so they will twist and turn your every word against you.
by lesostep | 2025-09-08 11:07:17+00:00
I live in a city where self-checkout was implemented for bus rides.

You still had a chance for a random bus inspection, but generally you can just walk into the bus and not pay anything, then walk out.

It was so strange at first, to see everyone paying when there was no authority demanding a payment.

Knowing that government trusts people around me to behave like good citizens, and knowing how many people actually follow the rules, definitely helped me to feel safer in the city.

15 years ago you had to put your wallet in the inner pocket because bags and outer pockets routinely got slashed. Now I can leave my bag on a bench. This difference got erased only when economy became more stable, and employment went up.

But I didn't know that I could leave my bag on a bench before I saw with my own eyes that almost everyone tries to be a good citizen. Even if there is no punishment and a small reward for behaving badly
by jay-barronville | 2025-09-08 11:08:24+00:00
As much as it’s true that there’s stochasticity involved in just about everything that we do, I’m not sure that that’s equivalent to everything we do being a stochastic process. With your dart example, a very significant amount of the stochasticity involved in the determination of where the dart lands is external to the human thrower. An expert human thrower could easily make it appear deterministic.
by Hamuko | 2025-09-08 11:08:58+00:00
Yeah, my iPhone 11 Pro came with the ultra-wideband chip in late 2019, and before the AirTags were released in early 2021, I believe the only thing it was used was for ordering AirDrop targets by proximity. It was clearly intended for the AirTags from the beginning, but it took about 1.5 years before it actually mattered.
by Fnoord | 2025-09-08 11:09:09+00:00
The countries which don't accept the current legal system have every interest to undermine its legal system by questioning it, spreading FUD, nitpicking on how it isn't perfect, playing the history card about colonies, and everything else from the dark triad handbook.

If countries such as China and Russia would recognize ICC, then these instances would've been investigated. For on paper they are worse than Srebrenica. The reason nothing happened with regards to Tibet is because of China's soft power. Same regarding Russia and Georgia, and if USA and IL are in cahoots with the Axis of Evil the West's soft power diminishes because the USA was the one keeping it all together. Hence you see the rest of West's defense industry scaling up.
by Tepix | 2025-09-08 11:09:12+00:00
> (1) It doesn't work reliably, because middleboxes don't pass DNSSEC/TLSA records reliably, so there has to be a downgrade path, so it's strippable.

They need to be fixed but yes it is a real problem from what i've heard.

> (2) It's much slower than the TLS WebPKI.

Caching should make it fast enough. Do you have real-world numbers?

> (3) There's no transparency log and never will be, both because it hasn't been designed and because Google and Mozilla basically had to mug the WebPKI CA's in a dark alley to make CT happen.

That is an excellent point. Do you have a solution?

> (4) It requires you to set up DNSSEC, which is so error prone that some of the largest engineering teams in the world have managed to take their sites (and also countries) offline.

I really don't like DNSSEC myself – i'd rather have seen DNSCurve https://dnscurve.org/ succeed – but at a certain point, i think we just have to go with it.
Show HN: I made a tool to turn anxiety-inducing news into short narrated videos
by simpnoza | 2025-09-08 11:09:32+00:00
Hey HN,

I'm a self-taught mediocre dev, currently jobless.

I’m spending way too much time doom-scrolling news and (fun but sometimes too dense) STEM articles.

Usually, I use LLMs to break them down into bite-sized nuggets. I wanted a more relaxed, enjoyable way to digest it all.

That sparked the idea for explainerslop.

I built it for one main reason: to skip the hassle of manual scripting, training new voice models, and overall production headaches. I just needed a way to paste an article and get the video.

My final vision includes setting up ensembles of famous characters to debate tough topics in their signature styles (think Spongebob optimistically unpacking climate change or Tony Soprano gruffly dissecting the latest tech corporate scandals)

Oh and it's totally free!!

Hope you’ll find it as useful as me. Would love your feedback pls

Rob
by balamatom | 2025-09-08 11:09:32+00:00
What do you do about the "oh, I'm the only one who cares about [???]? should I just fucking kill myself then?" Many such cases.

>How about doing it because your colleagues, who you presumably like collaborating with to reach a goal, asks you to?

If a someone wants me to do a certain thing in a certain way, they simply have to state it in terms of:

- some benefit they want to achieve

- some drawback they want to avoid

- as little as an acknowledged unexamined preference like "hey I personally feel more comfortable with approach X, how bout we try that instead"

I'm happy to learn from their perspective, and gladly go out of my way to accomodate them. Sometimes even against my better judgment, but hell, I still prefer to err on the side of being considerate. Just like you say, I like to work with people in terms of a shared goal, and just like you do, in every scenario I prefer to assume that's what's going on.

If, however, someone insists on certain approaches while never going deeper in their explanations than arbitrary non-falsifiable qualifiers such as "best practice", "modern", "clean", etc., then I know they haven't actually examined those choices that they now insist others should comply with. They're just parroting whatever version they imagine of industry-wide consensus describes their accidental comfort zone. And then boy do they hate my "make your setup assume less! it's the only way to be sure!". But no, I ain't reifying their meme instead of what I've seen work with my own two.
by joenot443 | 2025-09-08 11:09:38+00:00
I completely agree.

I’d be so much more impressed if OP had come up with an interesting use case for this “library” rather than just writing a single prompt and firing up a Show HN

macOS has hundreds of APIs. I’m not really convinced every single one needs a Claude wrapper library, nor am I convinced OP did any amount of interesting engineering work here.

It’s a bit like releasing a music album comprised entirely of Suno tracks - sure, it’s there, you can press play, but is it something to be proud of?
by m4rtink | 2025-09-08 11:09:43+00:00
I don't think dumping heat into the ground would work for any meaningful amount of time - both on Earth and on Mars the dirt and rock are not a very good conductor of heat, so you would quickly heat up your local "heat island" in the ground soon loose the temperature difference to run our heat engine on. Might work for pulsed operation where you wait for the affected area to cool down, but I am skeptical, given that a similar system is used for heat storage on Earth and it can take months to years for the temperature to return to natural values.

Most likely you would have to use air cooling, with lots of fans to push the thin atmosphere through massive heat exchangers. The overall lower atmosphere and general ground temperature (due to Mars being less heated by the Sun) should help offset this somewhat compared to cooling a reactor of the same power output in the vacuum of space.