MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by lucasyvas | 2025-09-04 14:32:17+00:00
I understand the user pool comment but don’t understand why you wouldn’t be able to have a rust layer that’s the same as the Python one API-wise.

I say this as a user of neither - just that I don’t see any inherent validity to that statement.

If you are saying Rust consumers want something lower level than you’re willing to make stable, just give them a higher level one and tell them to be happy with it because it matches your design philosophy.
by zahlman | 2025-09-04 14:32:29+00:00
>Exclude is particularly handy when you want to keep personal, non-standard files in a repository that is not yours, and where you cannot update its ignore files willy-nilly.

I've used it for this purpose before, but eventually I went back to just keeping a specific folder for those files, which contains its own .gitignore that excludes everything. (Note that Git doesn't track empty folders.) It accomplishes the same goal of not touching the "main project" .gitignore, but is generally easier to work with.
by thewebguyd | 2025-09-04 14:32:39+00:00
> "let's give this my full attention for just 5 minutes, and if I still don't want to do it we can move on".

I have to use this trick to help manage my ADHD. Of course, just actually starting for 5 minutes is a challenge in itself but while medicated at least I can. Giving myself a time limit as an easy out works wonders, and after 5 minutes I'm probably going to keep going.
by boringg | 2025-09-04 14:32:50+00:00
Vogtle is bad example. It was the first of its kind after a long stagnation of nuclear builds (US no longer has the ability to build and operate new nuclear) - that and the regulatory/licensing costs blew through the roof.

Vogtle is the wake-up call needed to get nuclear manufacturing/talent going again. I hear you but I think you are taking the wrong lesson.

I will add -- if indeed prices stay at Vogtle then yes Nuclear is dead. That said there's no way thats the new pricing going forward.
by mikeyouse | 2025-09-04 14:33:27+00:00
Why is anyone surprised that people who live in countries that rely on due process for punishment aren't convinced by the asterisk of "the US military doesn't have to abide due process outside of these imaginary lines"?

You can't just hand wave the due process issues away since the boat was in international waters. Rayiner's whole presumption is legally wrong as well.

We're not at war with Venezuela, and even if we were, we have laws against murder via the war crimes act (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2441 - (d)(1)(D)). And surprise surprise, the law qualifies that it only applies to those taking no part in the hostilities - which you'd need some sort of due process to justify. There's no statutory requirement for "big D" Due Process, but due process also has common usage meaning that was ignored here.

You can tell how legally dubious the action was by the lawyer Marco Rubio's mealy-mouthed rationale explaining that Trump ordered the attack, that he was given the option to capture or kill and he chose to kill them. Everyone who knows better is distancing themselves from the decision chain of the attack since only the President is protected via the Supreme Court's recently invented official acts privilege.

Edit; Rand Paul gets it: https://bsky.app/profile/atrupar.com/post/3lxxrrcb2bg2u ,this isn't complicated.
by afavour | 2025-09-04 14:33:37+00:00
> Lots of respect to Josh Miller, the CEO. TBC got to a difficult place. They built a product that was very very good, but evidently not good enough to support the capital they raised or the workforce they hired.

Was this not predictable from day one? There's no money in making a web browser. That ought to be obvious to anyone, let alone a superstar CEO. That they would end up selling the company seemed like a foregone conclusion.

I don't mean to disrespect the guy but I don't see much to credit here either. He had a problem, used VC cash to ignore it, then sold the company. Hardly uncommon in the tech world.
by NoGravitas | 2025-09-04 14:33:38+00:00
The barter myth is just that, a myth. Barter has never been observed in any society that had not previously been using money. Money, in fact, appears to arise not organically, but from the need early states to maintain standing armies. Creating markets denominated in currency allows you to simply pay your troops rather than maintaining their entire supply chain even when not on the march. And then requiring that taxes be paid in currency gives everyone a reason to accept currency for payment. It transforms your entire economy into a machine for feeding soldiers. This is not a thought experiment like the barter myth; it is documented in ancient sources from India, Mesopotamia, and China.

An article treatment: https://archive.is/20250725000932/https://www.theatlantic.co...

A book treatment (that of course covers many other things): https://archive.org/details/DebtTheFirst5000Years
by GuB-42 | 2025-09-04 14:33:45+00:00
> I simply cannot comprehend the callousness of people towards animals back then.

Just go to rural areas, where livestock farming is a common activity and people are confronted with animals as part of their daily life and you will see that animals are not always treated kindly.

For example, they may treat live chicken like you treat a KFC menu. It is food. When they want to eat chicken, they pick one up in the coop and kill it with the same detachment as you picking up your menu at the counter. Which is ironic because that farmer is probably treating his chicken way better than the ones destined for KFC.

Wild animals are just pests, if they cause damage to the crops and livestock, or game if edible. Dogs, horses, etc... are for work, guarding, herding, etc... they get some love, but they are nothing like pets.

In that context, animals are indeed more like "things". They still get some consideration, but so are things. Most people care for their cars for instance, they want it stay in good shape for as long as possible, same thing for animals.

I think the reason we care more about animals now is because as city dwellers, we don't really live with them, we have pets, we go to zoos or watch cute videos, so we have some unnatural empathy for them. Until they cause problems that is. Empathy for rats tend to go down rather quickly for people with a rat infestation.
by Mistletoe | 2025-09-04 14:33:51+00:00
I can't find them again and I have tried. It was these little books with black and white art and it was of classic novels, Frankenstein, etc. I can still see some of the images when I think of the books. It inspired a love in me for those stories that has lasted a lifetime.

My Mom was a special ed teacher and they were in her classroom as a set. I would go read them after school. Google Gemini suggested Classics Illustrated but I don't think that is it. These were black and white and cheaper than that. Something a teacher would have in their classroom.

Edit: Upon chiding Google Gemini and reminding it that it was black and white I think it found it!

Pocket Classics Comics From 1984.

https://gentlyhewstone.wordpress.com/2016/06/02/pocket-class...

https://www.ebay.com/itm/286295230816

Score one for AI because google search never found those for me.
by Chabsff | 2025-09-04 14:34:30+00:00
Yes, but you could also say that it was created so that advertisers stop doing complete nonsense like tracking pixels and other roundabout ways of accomplishing the same thing in ways that are sometimes (often?) detrimental to the user.

Sure, it's a form of capitulation to advertisers, that doesn't necessarily mean that it doesn't benefit the user.

If advertisers are going to be doing that stuff no matter what, corralling them has advantages. If anything, it makes creating an extension like OP's a lot easier than playing whack-a-mole with a litany of random techniques.
by cosmic_cheese | 2025-09-04 14:35:10+00:00
I’d like to ask the same thing. The main things I want from my browser are for it to be a good browser. Fast and secure with excellent tab and bookmark management capabilities. Anything else except maybe ad blocking is extraneous.

I understand that a lot of people live in their browsers, but for web apps I’d rather split them out into “installed” PWAs and have them benefit from system app/window management facilities than have them clog up my browser’s tabs.
by incomingpain | 2025-09-04 14:35:36+00:00
>Is this a common experience,

Yes when you're trying to do too big of things or you're prompt engineering skills need improvement.

>or am I missing a key technique to get better results?

You must be specific for what you want. Think of you being a senior dev and you're giving specific instructions to a junior dev who doesnt know better; who WILL misinterpret and do the very least to achieve what you asked for.

Almost like a Jinn/Geni they'll seemingly try to do the wrong thing if you arent clear and specific in your prompt.

Worse yet, sometimes, the AI will run off into left field doing all kinds of dumb stuff. hugely breaking the app and then you cry and start reverting hours of git changes. or worse HARD RESET.
by AlecSchueler | 2025-09-04 14:35:49+00:00
> I don't think your second paragraph is very good faith. It's not clear to me why this basic fact of piracy needs to be restated so often

Woah, woah, let's back up here. You made a metaphor about orders of magnitude. I asserted that orders of magnitude on the level of the global environment and the individual human are very different and provided you with a metaphor to illustrate that. I made no suggestion that piracy was theft so you had no need to correct me on this "basic fact."

> Everyone used to make more money

It's not clear what you're saying with this. Maybe we should just continue the trend and say no one should earn any money anymore? Honestly confused by this one.

> this could just as easily be further evidence that the current streaming model is worse and the harm is coming from megacorporations rather than individual behavior

How did we come to the current model? Everyone was happily getting recording contacts with advances for instruments, studio time and touring logistics until one day MegaCorps said "let's instead move to a model where everyone pays the absolute minimum, if anything at all, and then try to split the much lower profits between the same number of actors?"

Come on, I'm happy to criticise companies like Spotify all day but they weren't the driving force in creating the current model and having some of the richest people in our society sit around in forums like this saying maybe musicians shouldn't be paid at all really isn't helping
by xnorswap | 2025-09-04 14:36:02+00:00
A better summary of the ruling is that "Companies must follow their own procedures".

You can't fire someone without process. The ruling is that this wasn't "gross misconduct", and proper procedure for dealing with the behaviour should have been followed.

So before someone comes in claiming the UK to be an unruly anarchy, if you go around dissing the boss or your company then you'll still find yourself facing disciplinary action and could be eventually sacked, just not on the spot!
by knappa | 2025-09-04 14:36:25+00:00
You could definitely replace "Tuesday" with something like that and part of the pedagogical purpose of the problem is for people to question this. The actual effect comes from not distinguishing the boys. That increases the likelihood that at least one of them will be born on any particular day, upweighing the likelihood that there are larger numbers of boys. i.e. You just get, on average, better coverage of boys-born-on-Tuesday when there are more boys.
by Moto7451 | 2025-09-04 14:36:38+00:00
There’s a bunch of “AI” features being added to Jira if you’re a Jira Cloud customer. I don’t find them useful and maybe that’s a common issue. The features in Dia seem to kind of map to Jira and Confluence if you squint at it. Maybe this is just for that team to fix those features.
by const_cast | 2025-09-04 14:36:43+00:00
Advertisement targeting is a risk. Even just leaking your IP to various services introduces risks and being able to build profiles on your activities online introduces risk.

Usually the risk is you spend money you wouldn't have otherwise spend, but those profiles can also be used for future nefarious reasons. You're basically just relying on everyone running analytics to be good people, forever. Remember, anything on the internet is forever. And, even if they are, you're still relying on them having perfect security, forever. If a database breach happens and people now know everything data brokers and analytics services know... that's a problem.

IMO, nobody should browse the web without a reliable and trustworthy VPN, at all.
by littlecranky67 | 2025-09-04 14:36:47+00:00
That is just a very simplified and incomplete model. I never owned a car, so should I advocate to stop all fundings for streets? Well I consume products build by other people that use cars to go to work. Now, if I don't consume drinks of the Coca Cola Company, what if my cleaning lady enjoys those in her break? Direct vs. Indirect is not a good measure of value, PRICE is.
by abvdasker | 2025-09-04 14:36:57+00:00
> Most people use capitalism to describe a system where people trade goods and services with as little interference from government as possible.

This is not a real definition. Saying "most people" use the term to mean what you want it to mean in this argument is ridiculous.

Capitalism is a system of private ownership of capital. We live under that system. Anything you see that happens now is the result of that system because it's the one that exists.

There is no such thing as "crony capitalism". What came before crony capitalism? Was it regular capitalism? Did regular capitalism turn into crony capitalism? Or — more likely — is it all one continuous process and system of accumulation?
by FabHK | 2025-09-04 14:37:29+00:00
Yes, indeed, thanks for digging it up.

You see that Marilyn's answer contains the clarified correct specification ("the host, who knows what’s behind the doors and will always avoid the one with the prize..."), but the question does not fully specify it.

Thus, ignoring the clarification in the answer (which furthermore pertains to a modified problem), one could interpret the question differently: the host randomly opens a door [0], this specific day it happens to contain a goat, should you switch?

And that ambiguity has given rise to so much spilled ink (and, by the way, the misconception that statistic professors don't understand probability theory).

[0] Note that specifying that the host knows what's behind what door doesn't help. They could still pick a door randomly.
by Workaccount2 | 2025-09-04 14:37:57+00:00
If there is one good thing the admin might actually do, it's gut the incredibly suffocating regulations on nuclear.

Nuclear is only a fraction as expensive as the regulations around it. My company has a division that deals with the nuclear industry, and I really cannot overstate how incredibly intense they are.

Imagine your company issued laptops and required 14 different "live scanner" security apps running with twice daily full system scans. Now be a productive dev on that system. Would you be surprised if every project runs far over budget and far over timeline?
by ebiester | 2025-09-04 14:37:58+00:00
It's already invented - someone else mentioned Here and Island. It allowed us to onboard contractors without giving them computers because we could control a lot. It's an interesting idea on the business side and I'd say a good risk for Atlassian even though it won't be good for their current users.

Think about putting your business VPN and security controls in the browser. And if you can put your connection to AI and start building a productive workflow around it, that's an interesting proposition. It doesn't change interoperability on the web; it's a controlled client for the business use case.

This is being marketed to an entirely different group.
by lock1 | 2025-09-04 14:38:08+00:00
Unrelated to the gp post, but isn't LLMs more like a deterministic chaotic system than a "non-deterministic" one? "Tiny changes to the input can change the output quite a lot" is similar to "extreme sensitivity to initial condition" property of a chaotic system.

I guess that could be a problematic behavior if you want reproducibility ala (relatively) reproducible abstraction like compilers. With LLMs, there are too many uncontrollable variables to precisely reproduce a result from the same input.
by mindslight | 2025-09-04 14:38:12+00:00
All of that is true for all web ads. The friendly types of ads you're describing only work as offline ads.

If I am online I don't want any of that offline context following me around at the behest of a creepy surveillance industry. A web page knowing what is local to me or what I might be interested in is a bug. Frankly I categorize it in the realm of security vulnerabilities.

And that's still putting aside the question of why I would want to spend time/attention looking at any online ads. The ad for the local concert stuck on a bulletin board can be read while waiting for a burrito if I would otherwise be spacing out, or it can be ignored if I'm thinking about something else or otherwise don't feel like taking new input on new topics. Whereas web page ads are interspersed with what I'm already trying to do - it's like if I went to grab my burrito and the guy gave me a 30 second elevator pitch before he'd hand it over.

Whereas the alternative for online ads is blank 'white' space. If I am online, I'm positively engaged in doing something else. If I'm interested in local concert listings, then I will purposefully check out concert listings.
by 1718627440 | 2025-09-04 14:38:33+00:00
> I also wish that the world would settle on a sane date-time format like the ISO 8601 or RFC 3339 (both of which would reverse if my first wish is also granted).

YYYY-MM-DD to me always feels like a timestamp, while when I want to write a date, I think of a name, (for me DD. MM. YYYY).
by AlecSchueler | 2025-09-04 14:38:39+00:00
Maybe you could explain that logical continuation because I don't follow you.

Society has so far agreed to legislate in favour of people monetising their intellectual property.

By all means people should be free to disagree with that for whatever reason but I feel it's a bad look to make fun of the musicians trying to follow the rules and make a living within the bounds of both law and social contract.
by mananaysiempre | 2025-09-04 14:38:49+00:00
Thus far I’ve found Jira’s AI features to be basically nonsensical (and they’re constantly annoying me with downright childish amounts of bling, like if you asked a five-year-old to design a product box). So that seems perfectly in character.

All right, there’s a related-tickets feature that could have been great (witness the related-questions feature on Stack Overflow’s ask page, widely acknowledged to search better than the site’s actual search). It’s just no good at what it’s sup posed to do.
by CollinEMac | 2025-09-04 14:38:50+00:00
I'm a Neovim user but I have to agree with the recommendation. If you've wanted to check out vim/emacs but were nervous Helix is a good place to start.

I do wish there was at least the option to use vim keybindings in Helix though. The Helix keybindings are mostly the same but just different enough to be annoying if you're already used to vim.

Edit: typo
by tuckerman | 2025-09-04 14:39:35+00:00
> Security is a compromise.

To spell out the quote I allude to above, "give me liberty, or give me death!" We could eliminate a lot of bad things in the world if we were willing to give up freedoms.

Well intentioned but naive security researchers are constructing the very tools that will be used to by governments and corporations to restrict the rights and freedoms of users and I don't think we should stand for it.
by Ar__Aj | 2025-09-04 14:39:44+00:00
Here's the gist of how Python deals with garbage collection, in simple terms. Think of any object you create (a list, a dictionary, etc.) as a balloon. Every variable that points to it is a string holding it down. Python's main job is just counting the strings. When you get rid of the last variable pointing to an object—by reassigning it or because it goes out of scope—the "reference count" drops to zero. At that point, Python knows the balloon has no strings left and it can be cleared from memory. That's it for 99% of cases. It also has a separate, smarter collector that runs every so often to clean up weird edge cases (like two objects that only point to each other), but you almost never have to think about it. It’s one of those features that just works.
by taylodl | 2025-09-04 14:39:49+00:00
Economic policy is nuanced. Trump is the opposite of nuance - he's a bull in a China shop. Moreover, Trump has never once demonstrated a basic understanding of business, finance, or economics. Things are going sideways as a result: we're witnessing economic contraction, fewer jobs, lower profits, and higher inflation. All of these outcomes were predicted.

I remember when the GOP were regarded as the fiscal experts, but that reputation has eroded since they sold the government to billionaires 20 years ago. Today, the GOP is the party of crony capitalism and regulatory capture.
by TheOtherHobbes | 2025-09-04 14:40:14+00:00
There are people who think engineering is basically Lego but bigger, and people who think engineering is applied physics.

They're different jobs.

The Lego level is more like being a technician. You can slap a few ready-made building blocks together, maybe tweak them a little using basic algebra, and you've got your design.

That's fine for guitar amps and simple synth circuits and such.

But if you use that approach while designing the control circuitry for a power plant or a rocket motor, in the best case failure will be very expensive, worst case people will die.

That's where the real engineering happens. You're modelling systems from first principles and you know enough to be fairly confident that the equations you create to characterise a complex design with multiple inputs and outputs accurately predict its behaviour.

If you start with hobby electronics you have zero experience or insight into that level. So when you begin your course you're completely blindsided by how much math there is, and have no idea what it's for.

And some domains, like robotics, have even more math. You can use plain old EE control theory, but you can extend it into modelling systems using Lie groups and Lie algebras - which are more often used in quantum physics.
by teiferer | 2025-09-04 14:40:56+00:00
> Two, regarding aging populations, against that we'll have AI and robots doing stuff before most people retire.

We also have immigration against that. Lots of people in their late 10s or early 20s ready to start contributing to the economy. But most western countries have to much right wing populism going on to realize that that's a solution and work on proper integration efforts. Easier to pull the criminal foreigners card and collect votes at the next election.
by icedshrimp | 2025-09-04 14:41:27+00:00
Honestly this reminds me of some of the promises that were made when the american animation industry switched to 3D because it was "cheaper"

A modern animated Disney 3D animated film consistently costs over 100-200 million dollars while movies like Klaus were made for about 40 million. Japan still animates on PAPER.

At the end of the days new tools have their usecases but I think especially in creative domains (which software definitely is) old techniques aren't invalidated by the creation of new ones.

ZBrush still crushes all other sculpting apps with some very well written low level code and assembly. It doesn't even use the GPU for crying out loud. If you proposed that as your solution for a graphically intensive 3D app you'd be laughed at, but software based raseterization/simple ray tracing takes the cake here. It could handle 20 million polygons at buttery smooth framerates in 2007, and isn't burdened by the VRAM drought we're in.

Don't let people tell you new tools make the old useless.