MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by andrewflnr | 2025-09-20 07:03:24+00:00
That's not a crazy instinct, and maybe if OSs were better you would even be right, but there's not really another way to get a skrillion communicating processes that can all crash/fail independently. Without a dedicated VM, all the other approaches are either less safe or too inefficient.

I consider BEAM an indication of a direction that OSs could and maybe should move. It's even possible to run BEAM on bare metal, (almost?) entirely in place of the normal OS.
by NitpickLawyer | 2025-09-20 07:04:13+00:00
If this is sonoma-dusk that was on preview on openrouter, it's pretty cool. I've tested it with some code reverse engineering tasks, and it is at or above gpt5-mini level, while being faster. Works well till about 110-130k tokens tasks, then it gets the case of "getthereitis" and finishes the task even if not all constraints are met (i.e. will say I've solved x/400 tests, the rest can be done later)
by drysine | 2025-09-20 07:04:18+00:00
>Russia attacked Georgia

"Georgia started war with Russia: EU-backed report.

An independent report blamed Georgia on Wednesday for starting last year's five-day war with Russia, but said Moscow's military response went beyond reasonable limits and violated international law." [0]

[0] https://www.reuters.com/article/world/georgia-started-war-wi...
by jpc0 | 2025-09-20 07:04:25+00:00
The entire point was that WASM just calls to the existing C functions, the ones you would call from literally any language.

If you care about memory safety then use a “memory safe” language that guarantees the exact same thing as what you thing WASM guarantees except without all the pointless overhead or running a sandboxed interpreter inside a sandboxed operating system process, it is actually just pointless complexity at that point.

For native development WASM gives no benefits, the only useful parts that WASM might bring literally hasn’t been standardised because it’s a real hard problem to solve and has no use in browser.

So wasm is designed for the browser and unless you only intend to embed a library in your existing JS application it is pointless because you are still restricted to the DOM.
by johnisgood | 2025-09-20 07:04:50+00:00
> But hey, I don’t think it’s a problem! I write a lot of code using LLMs, mostly for learning (and… ejem, some of it might end up in production) and I’ve always found them great tools for learning (supposing you use the appropriate context engineering and make sure the agent has access to updated docs and all of that). For example, I wanted to learn Rust so I half-vibed a GPUI-based chat client for LLMs that works just fine and surprisingly enough, I actually learned and even had some fun.

As I wrote in another comment, it is not inherently a bad thing. I use LLMs too (while knowing what I am doing), and if the project works, why not?
by jltsiren | 2025-09-20 07:04:57+00:00
H-1B is the default visa for international faculty hires. You can get it in a few months with relatively little effort. O-1 is more expensive, takes longer to get, and requires more effort from the applicant. Then there is the subjective approval process that involves a degree of risk, and in the end, you get a slightly inferior visa.

Green cards are almost useless for hiring, as the processing times are too long. "We would like to offer you this position, but conditionally. We still need a year or two to handle the bureaucracy, and we can't say for sure if we are actually allowed to hire you. Please don't accept another position meanwhile."
by KronisLV | 2025-09-20 07:05:06+00:00
Latvia, when it released over here it was around 350 EUR for a LE B580, not from an individual scalper but a regular e-commerce store that sells all sorts of parts. For comparison's sake, a regular RTX 3060 12 GB (not Ti) was 300 EUR around that time.

In other countries, any place that sold them at near-MSRP very much was out of stock immediately (not that there was that much of it to begin with, which is my critique), leaving other vendors to raise the prices to around 350 USD and the more greedy ones and scalpers all the way up to 400 USD, I saw those listings myself:

https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/where-to-buy...

https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/intel-arc-b580-out-o...

Whether anyone actually bought those is another question entirely, but a GPU that's only available to you at 350 USD but should have been sold for 250 USD (and performs well for that price) is just plainly bad value.

It is nice that since the prices have dropped, however the hype around it is already past, so we're in the long tail of the product's lifecycle, especially with things like the CPU driver overhead being identified and getting lots of negative press. They had a chance to move a lot of units at launch thanks to positive reviews from pretty much everyone... and they fumbled it.
by anonymoushn | 2025-09-20 07:05:30+00:00
you can have some vector registers n_acc, ns, idx_acc, idxs, then you can do

// (initialize ns and idxs by reading from the array // and adding the apropriate constant to the old value of idxs.) n_acc = min(n_acc, ns); const is_new_min = eq(n_acc, ns); idx_acc = blend(idx_acc, idxs, is_new_min);

Edit: I wrote this with min, eq, blend but you can actually use cmpgt, min, blend to avoid having a dependency chain through all three instructions. I am just used to using min, eq, blend because of working on unsigned values that don't have cmpgt

you can consult the list of toys here: https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/docs/intrinsics-guid...
by bob1029 | 2025-09-20 07:05:48+00:00
Measuring photons in this manner gives you the best randomness. It is effectively a quantum technique. A PN junction is (mostly) classical.

The specific mechanism is mentioned in the article:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spontaneous_emission

> Although there is only one electronic transition from the excited state to ground state, there are many ways in which the electromagnetic field may go from the ground state to a one-photon state. That is, the electromagnetic field has infinitely more degrees of freedom, corresponding to the different directions in which the photon can be emitted. Equivalently, one might say that the phase space offered by the electromagnetic field is infinitely larger than that offered by the atom. This infinite degree of freedom for the emission of the photon results in the apparent irreversible decay, i.e., spontaneous emission.
by roer | 2025-09-20 07:06:18+00:00
For the android spot I'd like to recommend Seal: https://f-droid.org/packages/com.junkfood.seal/

It's "just" a yt-dlp frontend with a nice UI, meaning it works with sites other than youtube as well.

It also adds a quick-download option to the android sharing menu when sharing a link, which I've found incredibly convenient.
by tpoacher | 2025-09-20 07:06:29+00:00
This is completely misguided for two reasons.

1) you're talking about ADHD which is a disability. It's like asking someone with no legs if they could sprout legs if the reason was compelling enough. The answer is still no.

2) If you were to counter the above by saying that, if you were compelled enough you might devote a small fortune and a few years training yourself and researching how to develop and use bionic legs, we then run into problem no 2: exceptional incentives / circumstances are not scalable, and the logic cannot be applied to problems of daily routine.

Back when I was a med student, I was expected to attend a clinic which started at 9. Unfortunately the local bus always arrived at that stop at 9:05, and the line was known for its flakiness. The route was 1h and 5min long, and I was about an hour's walk away from the stop myself. So in order to be at the hospital at 8:05 instead of 9:05, I aimed for the 7am bus, meaning I woke up at 5:30 to get to it. Except the 7am bus never showed up. So I waited another hour and got the 8am one, which inevitably arrived at 9:05.

When I got to the clinic 5 minutes late and got told off, I explained what happened, and the consultant said exactly the same thing you said: if there was a pot of money waiting you'd have been on time.

Yes except there wasn't, and I have to be at clinic every day, there was no way of knowing the first bus would not show up, and I can't afford to wake up at 4:30 everyday to get two buses ahead of the 8am one, just because some idiot thinks an imaginary pot of guilt-trip money would have instantly solved the problem.
by intermerda | 2025-09-20 07:06:44+00:00
> A democrat should've been there so we flip a coin and decide the gender of your kid.

Nice strawman.

> The democrats went too far left which is why they lost.

The democrats lost because they underestimated the stupidity and overestimated the decency of the American public. They are so bad at politics that they couldn't even prevent half the country to stop supporting a pedophile - you included.
by onethumb | 2025-09-20 07:07:22+00:00
This looks super interesting for single-AZ systems (which are useful, and have their place).

But I can't find anything to support the use case for highly available (multi-AZ), scalable, production infrastructure. Specifically, a unified and consistent cache across geos (AZs in the AWS case, since this seems to be targeted at S3).

Without it, you're increasing costs somewhere in your organization - cross-AZ networking costs, increased cache sizes in each AZ to be available, increased compute and cache coherency costs across AZs to ensure the caches are always in sync, etc etc.

Any insight from the authors on how they handle these issue on their production systems at scale?
by nrds | 2025-09-20 07:07:54+00:00
> minds struggle

I never believed this explanation for SC as provided by Culture-aligned unreliable narrators. It seems far more likely that it's an outlet for people who desire to have control over others, a supermajority of the West which is conspicuously absent from the novels.

I recently finished Inversions and I think this novel supports my hypothesis by featuring citizens whose needs in this direction are being fulfilled directly or indirectly via SC.

Incidentally when Minds actually want to get things done urgently, they go beyond SC; see Excession. This supports that SC is a playground for human (and drone/other AI) expression rather than an actual power-center of the Culture.
by johnisgood | 2025-09-20 07:08:04+00:00
Fair enough, but I have made a couple of projects in Odin using Claude, and Odin is evolving too, and it is much more obscure than Zig. I made these projects successfully by feeding the LLM the documentation of Odin and gave it example projects... thus, if I could create Odin projects (with some reiterations and hand-holding, true), then Zig should be even better.
by remus | 2025-09-20 07:08:33+00:00
> Explicitly saying you're compatible with any future breaking changes!? You can't possibly know that!

I kind of like it in a way. In a lot of eco systems it's easy for package publishers to be a bit lazy with compatibility which can push a huge amount of work on package consumers. R seems similar to go in this regard, where there is a big focus on not breaking compatibility which then means they are conservative about adding new stuff until they're happy to support it for a long time.
by malkia | 2025-09-20 07:08:35+00:00
If the monorepo is build and tested by single build system (bazel, buck, etc.), then it can graph leaf dependencies with no users. For example library + tests, but no one using it (granted it might be something new popping out, still in early development).

Bazel has the concept of visibility where while you are developing something in the tree, you may explicitly say who can use it (like trial version).

But the point is, if something is build, it must be tested, and coverage should catch what is build, but not tested, but also should catch what is build and tested but not really used a lot.

But why remove it, if it takes no time to build & test (?), and if it takes more time to test, it's usually on your team to start your own testing env, and not rely on the general presubmit/preflight one, and because since the last capacity planning you have only that amount of budget, you'll soon realize - do we really need this piece of code & the tests?

I mean it's not perfect, there would be always something churning using time & money, but until it's pretty big problem it won't go away automatically (yet)
by fa3556 | 2025-09-20 07:09:00+00:00
I think this criticism is unfair because most common packages are covered by the core and extra repos which are maintained by Arch Linux. AUR is a collection of user build scripts and using it has a certain skill cliff such that I expect most users to have explicit knowledge of the security dangers. I understand your concern but it would be weird and out of scope for Arch to maintain or moderate AUR when what Arch is providing here amounts to little more than hosting. Instead Arch rightly gives the users tools to moderate it themselves through the votes and comments features. Also the most popular AUR packages are maintained by well known maintainers.

The derivatives are obviously completely separate from Arch and thus are not the responsibility of Arch maintainers.
by awesome_dude | 2025-09-20 07:09:23+00:00
> I don’t see how disagreeing with you constitutes “a complete and utter lack of grasp of the subject”. That’s hyperbole.

Your complaint is that I am applying your measure with the same effort that you did to me.

The current upper bounds are constantly being reviewed, just as with other active areas of research. With that in mind, we don't really know what the final upper bound might be, we can only say with any semblance of surety that the upper bound at any given point in time is limited by our imagination (read: our ability to create new and possible novel ways to model the future)
by dotancohen | 2025-09-20 07:10:56+00:00
> When you control the food and water supply for two million people, and turn that off for months until they are starved and malnourished -- then your words indicating this is deliberate, given it could only be deliberate anyway, are interpreted differently, yes.

You confuse "control" with "provide". Israel provides the Gaza strip with food, water, electricity. This is because UNRWA removed all need for the Gazans to develop their own self sufficiency.

The water and electricity were cut off to pressure the governing body to return the babies that they kidnapped. Return the Gazans decide the want the services back, they are invited to return the hostages. That has been the stance since day one.

> When you're imprisoned inside a walled high-security island and your greatest military capability is to kill 100s of people outside of it, your words indicating a desire to eradicate one of the most militarised, highly-financed and capable states in the world -- do carry a different significance.

Yes, exactly. The Gazans publicly declare their intent to genocide.

> One group has the capability to entirely destroy the other, is actively engaged in that pursuit, and its most senior political figures have indicated their intent to do so.

Exactly. The Muslims have not only the capacity to destroy the Jewish state, they are engaged in a multi-front effort to do so. Hamas is one of those fronts. The media is another one.

> Another group has almost no military capabilities, insofar as they exist, they are presently engaged in a fight for their survival -- and otherwise, their entire civilian population is presently being decimated with their children being mass starved, and a very large percentage of their entire population dead or injured.

You are inverting the victim-perpetrator perception by trying to suggest the this conflict is Israel vs Gazans, whereas it is clear that the conflict is Muslim vs Jews. You need only to listen to Israel's enemies to understand that. Why those bodies are under no media nor UN scrutiny is very suspicious.

If you doubt it, then tell me why Hezbollah attacked Israel the day after Hamas? Why are the Houthis involved? Why did Iran bomb us?

> If you think words are to be interpted absent this context, then I cannot imagine you're very sincere in this.

I actually imagine that you are sincere in your concern, and now that I've demonstrated that the charges against Israel are inverted you may reconsider your position.
by SpicyLemonZest | 2025-09-20 07:12:42+00:00
There's absolutely a need for personal attacks. By suggesting that people ought to just give in and accept this as the new reality, you are supporting it, and you need to know that this represents a severe moral flaw. You're not just being pragmatic, or realistic, or whatever polite fiction you tell yourself to avoid having to take a stand. You're being a bad person, intentionally doing your part to make the country worse in the hopes that you can be a little more comfortable. Change your ways now or you'll bear the shame the rest of your life.
by fakedang | 2025-09-20 07:13:36+00:00
Doesn't matter if you guys shun out the immigrant population and let ignoramuses multiply, while forcing American universities to toe the federal government's line for federal funding.

In China's case, the population decrease is actually a positive for them since they are primarily an exports-driven economy. A lower population means investing into automation at an extensive degree to retain the same production levels, without the need to feed that much of a population. And if China really needs an extra labour pool, they have no qualms doing the Middle Eastern playbook and bringing in tons of workers from low-wage countries to do the dirty jobs - in fact, they already do that with Africans.

Russia is in trouble though, but given that their industries are slowly being eaten by Chinese conglomerates, they are a has-been now.
by bruce511 | 2025-09-20 07:13:43+00:00
Let's leave aside the Googles of this world, and focus on mid and small companies (as you asked.)

I think one of the cores to answering this is funding- as in "where do the funds for your job come from?"

So a VC funded startup has a model with a very small number of customers (ie VCs). Failure to make a sale (round of investment) means layoffs.

Businesses which have a small number of valuable customers are in the same boat. If Kodak is your big (only) customer and Kodak goes under...

By contrast, say, a healthy business with positive cash flow takes some of that cash to fund a new Sales position. (Assuming competence as you asked) that job is pretty safe. Yes markets fluctuate, yes external events can happen (like Covid or Tarrifs) but hopefully you don't succumb to that.

Or take a small company, excess cash flow, decides to branch into a new space. Jobs in that new space are vulnerable until returns start flowing. Once cash flow increases to cover costs the jobs there become a lot more secure.

Lastly I'd say that speed of growth is directly correlated to speed of shrinking. Businesses that grow hundreds of jobs a week (in the good times) are more likely to shed hundreds of jobs a week in the bad times.
by Joel_Mckay | 2025-09-20 07:14:01+00:00
Samsung actually had a technological lead in many areas, and it translated into real revenue. They are a business, and exist to provide utility to consumers in exchange for investor profit:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KCWDzWG1BcI

Many incentives to push technology forwards are high-risk/expensive investments, and expecting the public/customers to willingly help pay that cost is naive:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cru2bkqwSYk

I assure you academic funding does not cover such large costs, government grants are only a fraction of expected taxes in late stage Technology Readiness Levels, and competitor/cloner fractured markets erode fiscal returns needed to pay for the total incurred project cost.

Apple makes minimal utility products, but relies on intangible branding to maintain perceived value. Thus, only Apple could get away with selling zero chip designer handbags, and would still make absurd revenue (not a real product yet.) Steve Jobs observed very early, that selling raw motherboards was a low margin business. Which it was why the company shifted into consumer products.

For almost every other brand, consumers have shown they prefer the near material cost in opportunistic China/India factories, and thus simply ignore most firms products that include 10 years of R&D costs to pay back the investors.

There are many shelved technologies that will never see a Patent or the public markets. This is because the conditions are not ready for advanced products yet, and competitors irrationally nurture the lowest value volume market sectors. Thus, everyone gets a 15% value boost at regular intervals, and people remain excited about 3 decade old technology.

Qualcomm cellular chip product lines essentially lived off iPhone sales. Like any loyal dog, they will unlikely bite the hand that feeds them...

Rule #3: popularity is not an indication of utility.

Have a wonderful day =3
by dotancohen | 2025-09-20 07:14:23+00:00
> Ooh, can we dismiss all statements from someone who is related to someone who worked for the Israeli government or was in the IDF too?

Isn't that exactly what is done? I've been accused of being impartial and biased many times right here on HN due to being Israeli. Should we not also acknowledge her impartiality and bias?
by rafaelmn | 2025-09-20 07:14:26+00:00
>Of course, you could "manage" this complexity by attributing api boundary/layers, and these api changes are deemed to be important to not change too often. But that simply means you're a monorepo only in name - not too different from having different repos with versioned artefacts with a defined api boundary.

You have visibility into who is using what and you still get to do an atomic update commit even if a commit will touch multiple boundaries - I would say that's a big difference. I hated working with shared repos in big companies.
by axiolite | 2025-09-20 07:14:36+00:00
You could have been a legit viewer... clicking to skip over segments of the video, presumably trying to find where you left off last time, or for some scene you remember, or the climax of the video... whatever.

Youtube does try to throttle the data speeds, when that first happened, youtube-dl stopped being useful and everyone upgraded their python versions and started using yt-dlp instead.
by wqaatwt | 2025-09-20 07:14:55+00:00
How do you move past the initial hurdle of the at least several first iterations of this device being inferior to the competition in every single way, though?

And even if you solve the software issue, a “modular” phone like that will be bulky, heavy and have permanently outdated hw without really offering anything in return for that for >95% of its potential user base.

> to force people to upgrade.

So if they had to pick between a modern device with closed hw/software and something allegedly good enough for them but has an inferior screen, camera, battery, is heavier and has poor quality software. How do you force them to buy it?
by tlavoie | 2025-09-20 07:16:08+00:00
I'd love to see software adopt strong capabilities-based models that enforce boundaries even within parts of a program. That is, with the principle of least authority (POLA), code that you call is passed only the capabilities you wish (e.g. opening a file, or a network socket), and not everything that the current process has access to. Thomas Leonard's post (https://roscidus.com/blog/blog/2023/04/26/lambda-capabilitie...) covers this in great detail, and OCaml's newer Eio effect system will has aspects of this too.

The Emily language (locked-down subset of OCaml) was also interesting for actively removing parts of the standard library to get rid of the escape hatches that would enable bypassing the controls.