MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by noir_lord | 2025-09-14 19:50:23+00:00
To an extent it’s a skill you can practice if not learn.

By nature I’m a slow thinker but I can mode switch if I need to but it’s exhausting after a while in a weird way I put it down to working in the trades before switching to programming full time, some of the fastest funniest people you’ll ever meet are tradesmen on job sites (introversion doesn’t mean poor social skills after all though they get conflated).

If you are generally happy as you are don’t sweat it, be a boring world if we where all the same.
by TacticalCoder | 2025-09-14 19:51:49+00:00
> SGI hardware was the sexiest hardware of the 1990s, and IRIX was the sexiest UNIX OS of the same period.

Back in the 90s my best friend's stepfather happened to be the top dog of SGI Benelux (Belgium / The Netherlands / Luxembourg) so... My best friend had an SGI Indy (Indy, not Indygo) at home.

After school we'd go back to his place and have fun with the Indy. That thing already had a webcam (in, what, 1993?).

I remember a 3D demo of oil pipelines, some crazy music video with little balls bouncing on top of sound waves and... the terminal. I learned my very first Un*x command on that thing.

One one hand we had Commodore Amiga and games nearly as good as the arcade and on the other hand we had the Indy.

We of course also had our mediocre beige PC with an even more mediocre OS: DOS and then Windows.

Thankfully a few years late Linux came out and saved us from mediocrity.
by eternityforest | 2025-09-14 19:51:59+00:00
The Lourdes vs Lourdes issue could be partially solved by adding some context when searching.

Show the population and average number of other people going there, or a few pictures of the area, or even just have an LLM review what you're about to do.

I think the best GUI UXes always make the object you're going to act on visible in detail with context, they don't let you do anything to something you can't observe.

Like a file manager, not only can you restore from trash, you if you can see the file itself, you can also see the other stuff in the same folder, probably a thumbnail, maybe the modification date and the size, etc.

The file manager enforces a two way conversation, it's hard to act on an object without observing it.
by edmundsauto | 2025-09-14 19:52:03+00:00
Would you get annoyed if someone said the same thing about your given name? If your name is Peter and someone called you Mike because they don’t care enough or are oddly stubborn and just want to refer to you how they want… it’s pretty damn annoying. It’s identity nullifying - a deliberately sent signal that I’m not willing to make a minimal effort to acknowledge your identity.
by Muromec | 2025-09-14 19:52:10+00:00
That isn't always a scam actually. A lot of old fa^W men retire and marry a citizen to secure rights to the land under their house. I have seen a lot of that (entire gated communities) and it all seemed long-term and high-commitment and in a good faith. Ones on the younger side of their 60ies mostly have a business of some sort and kids together too.

I don't know how much love is there in these marriages and don't draw any judgement either.
by Quekid5 | 2025-09-14 19:52:11+00:00
> why wouldn't we just look at this and say "this is a normal way for a human being to operate" and refuse to pathologize it

I don't think it's so much about that... it's more that having a label for a common set of behaviors/symptoms can be a shorthand to explain things more succinctly.

Btw, would you say the same thing about clinical depression? Why/why not?

> Why drug your way to a different thinking style?

Because ADHD (and other things) can be crippling when it comes to actually getting IRL shit that needs doing... done. "We live in a society" is a meme, but there's actually a lot of stuff that can present non-trivial hurdles for neuro-divergent people IRL ... like filing taxes, going to an unemployment office, etc. etc.

(Also, that's not quite what the drugs do if you have ADHD, but I digress)
by GregarianChild | 2025-09-14 19:52:18+00:00
Can you explain the benefit of renaming dataflow as 'neuromorphic'?

You do understand that dataflow architectures have been tried many many times? See [1] for a brief history. MIT had a bit dataflow lab for many years (lead by the recently deceased Arvind). What is the benefit of re-inventing dataflow architectures by complete amateurs who are not at all aware of the 1/2 century research tradition on dataflow architecture, and the very clear and concrete reasons when this architecture has so far failed whenever it was tried for general purpose processors?

We can not even apply Santayana's "those who forget their history are condemned to repeat it because the 'neuromorphic' milieu doesn't even bother understanding this history.

[1] https://csg.csail.mit.edu/Dataflow/talks/DennisTalk.pdf
by softwaredoug | 2025-09-14 19:52:28+00:00
Anyone who has a restless dog in the evenings can see DMN create anxiety.

Like many dogs, my dog gets bored and looks for something to bark at. He scans out the window like I scan social media. He’s got extra energy that seems to need to go somewhere, and that somewhere seems to be looking out the window scanning for threats, barking, sounding meaner than he actually is.

It’s like he manufactures anxiety out of nothing else to do.
by pclmulqdq | 2025-09-14 19:52:53+00:00
I haven't played the new version, but there's a good chance they cut off the information you need (likely because of us, honestly) because each person needs to see the amount of inventory going into the previous step in the supply chain. That way they can keep inventories perfectly drained except at the retailer.

If you use knowledge of the deck, you can obviously pre-solve things, but that was not an assumption here - our thing works without knowledge of the order deck.

The "new beer game" looks totally different, honestly.
by ants_everywhere | 2025-09-14 19:53:03+00:00
Well certainly the quality of your comments is very low. You're just repeating low-effort anti-science rhetoric.

You're implying that people can't handle your brilliant understanding of logical flaws, but you've given no evidence that you even understand the basics.

Since you're writing low quality conspiratorial comments, people are assuming you're just as uninformed as your comments imply. You keep trying to imply that you know more than everybody else and are just unwilling to show it.

So if you have something to say to add to the conversation then now would be the time to do so. Otherwise we'll go on assuming you are just confused.
by thephyber | 2025-09-14 19:53:32+00:00
> I kind of find it unbelievable that people fall for this stuff

I remember reading a headline that being poor is equivalent to losing about 5 IQ points. Don’t know how true that is, but my intuition tells me that most people financially struggle, spend a lot of extra time worrying about money, and in general act a little more desperate and would be a little more aware/skeptical if their stress + financial situation allowed it.

After a few years working in cybersecurity, I viewed EVERYTHING through the lens of “is someone lying to me?”. Emails, text messages, downloading software from a website/App Store, job offers, investment opportunities, etc.the surface area is limitless. There’s exactly zero chance that even an experienced professional with excellent eyesight, who reads up on the newest scams, who doesn’t have lots of family / social events to care for, etc will never get hacked/scammed.

Even in the cybersecurity industry, almost all companies have abandoned the idea that there will never be a breach, and have moved towards thinking about resiliency, where any breaches that do happen are minimized or closed quickly/automatically.

That’s a lot of words to say: even though I thought I would never get scammed, once I spent more time educating myself about how it happens, it seems obvious to me that scams work a percentage of the time and the scale of attempts is enormous.
by novaleaf | 2025-09-14 19:53:52+00:00
IIRC they chat group was using LINE, where the scammers can delete messages / kick people at will. So more people joining just to make a few bucks from the initial payout just increases the credibility of the operation.

Also the initial "tasks" the mark performs are worth only like a few USD. not worth anybody's time except for certain types of vulnerable people who not-coincidentally make good victims.
by gjsman-1000 | 2025-09-14 19:54:31+00:00
I think you're confusing technical encryption with the privacy of encryption.

For example, let's say I implemented a CSAM-scanning AI model in my chat app, which runs locally against your message, before communicating the message over an encrypted HTTPS channel. If the message is flagged, it can be sent over an encrypted HTTPS channel to authorities, on a secondary separate connection. At no point, did it leave the device, in unencrypted form.

Is that message encrypted? Yes.

The way that you want? No.

Governments have recognized this distinction, and have figured out they can have their cake and eat it too; the security of encryption with none of the privacy.
by throwuxiytayq | 2025-09-14 19:54:58+00:00
“May have” doesn’t indicate conclusion - you’re the one being quick. That said, the article really does seem to describe the symptoms of inattentive ADHD with a breadth of cues and close precision.

As to the rest of your comment, not to diminish your experience, it’s really difficult to tell what you’re trying to say, and how that has to do with any of the very specific symptoms and experiences mentioned.
by spankibalt | 2025-09-14 19:55:40+00:00
> Tja... that's the problem; images are almost nonexistant. Before today, I've only seen this particular machine in two German computer magazines.

The first source is the December 1989 issue of the Happy Computer, containing a report from the Munich tradeshow "Systems", which took place from 16th to 20th October 1989. You'll find a picture of the Snofru on pages 124 and 125. According to the description, its guts are a 386 with 25 MHz, 4 MB RAM, and an 80 MB HDD (12 ms). 1989 price: 35,000 DM. Meadata Technologies was a Munich outfit. Here, the machine is shown in a gold or sandy taupe livery. [1/2]

There is at least one other German magazine which reported on this very machine; it think it was the c't. Oddly enough, they showed a very small picture of an all-black machine. But maybe I just misremembered; I have to look that up. [3]

[1] Magazine online-view here: [https://reader.kultmags.com/Happy%20Computer%201989-12]

[2] Direct download of the archived mag here: [https://kultmags.com/Happy%20Computer/1989/Happy%20Computer%...]

[3] EDIT: After checking my archive I see I didn't misremember. The December 1989 issue of the c't has a picture of the Snofru on page 18. The styling is all-black with some red highlights. It also goes into a bit more detail on the specs: Intel motherboard, 64 KByte cache, 4 MByte RAM standard (expandable to 24 MByte; the below-referenced DOS International also mentions RAM expansion cards), a Plus (a Quantum subsidiary) Impulse hard disk system with a maximum of two internal HDDs (80 MB options were offered), as well as two controllers for connecting external storage for a combined maximum of ca. 2.6 GByte. Graphics card is a Video Seven. The PSU was located in the the top of the pyramid and has an "allegedly" very quiet fan, which was embedded in a dampening enclosure made of rubber. The envisioned application of the machine was to be that of a fast, networked file server.

[4] EDIT 2: The December '89 issue of DOS International IDs the machine as "Snofru XXV" and shows two small pictures: the all-black version on page 6, and a seethrough illustration on page 8. The magazine can be found here: [https://kultmags.com/DOS%20International/1989/DOS%20Internat...]. The text also makes note of "confidential" impartiations relating to orders by "high-ranking managers" of "well-known banks".

[5] Finnish mag Bitti shows the all-black machine on page 23 of issue 9/90 as well (photo repro only in bw). Price: 87,400 Suomen markka.
by delusional | 2025-09-14 19:56:23+00:00
> Who, exactly, is so strongly motivated to make such legislation?

For the part that Denmark is playing, I think the answer is somewhat readily found in the current national politics of Denmark. We've just had a pretty prominent politician 7 years ago get convicted of being in possession of CSAM. I think that's very personally offensive to our current prime minister. That has to be viewed along with her personal view of herself as the "children's prime minister", to make it into a double whammy.

We've also been dealing an inability of the police to investigate some crime, and the investigative committee established to figure out what to do about it recommended an ability for police to more readily be able to investigate digital material. I imagine the current policymakers imagine Chat Control to play a part of enabling that at a national level.
by dns_snek | 2025-09-14 19:58:11+00:00
I'm not the one trying to rationalize clear calls to violence under the guise of oh gosh we can't possibly know what he meant in any one of hundreds of examples, but your continued gaslighting attempts have been noted.

You can't claim that things are being taken out of context when you can't possibly come up with context where his statements mean anything other than a call to violence when context is added.

There are HUNDREDS of these statements, but your idea of a debate seems to be declaring complete ignorance over the unambiguous meaning of most of these statements and declaring victory when the other person realizes what stripes you're really wearing and backs out.

Just to make a point, I think people like him should do what Hitler did in the end. What do I mean by this? I guess you'll never know.
by Quekid5 | 2025-09-14 19:59:58+00:00
It's surveillance companies, i.e. follow the money. Imagine if you can force every IM app to include your nonsense? BILLIONS of instant installs and subscription fees.

The EU ombudsman actually asked the EU Council to comply with a Freedom of Information request about who attended the meetings about this and all we got was a fully redacted PDF with a list of about 30-40 individuals/groups (literally blacked out in the PDF). It's absurd how non-transparently this is bought & paid for.
by pointyfence | 2025-09-14 19:59:59+00:00
I journal to create a concrete representation of my thoughts at a point in time. Writing with intent to explain to yourself forces a structured view on assumptions, deductions, inductions, etc. rather than having them bounce around in your head as a wobbly mass of jello.

The structuring of your thoughts and emotions, by nature, forces a certain amount of meta cognition and distance from your feelings as you can more easily identify and further think about the insights, inconsistencies, etc. You have a scaffolding that you can continue to build on or rebuild.

Beyond the immediate thinking, it's also interesting to see how the thoughts on something change over time or how they relate to other topics. Now, I'm thinking about my thinking rather than just focusing on the immediate topic.

Deep thinking without a sense of permanence can be great as a start of ideas. You need a low cost way for ideas to form where you can pick the most promising ones for more introspection. But without permanence, there's this danger that you get lost in your half-formed thoughts because it has a lot of "feel" in it and makes it hard to build on or critique. There's a danger that you end up going down an Escher staircase mentally and emotionally that seems like the logical, immediate thing to do but is a contradiction at a higher level.
by yellowapple | 2025-09-14 20:00:18+00:00
The thing about nuclear is that the land area consumed per unit of energy is, like the deaths per unit of energy, extremely low. You can “cover all of Europe” without needing to put very many people (if any) in the potential exclusion zone.

Even with that being said, those safety numbers have held even with China building large numbers of reactors in relatively dense areas. I'd be surprised if European reactors turned out to pose much of a higher risk.
by bigbadfeline | 2025-09-14 20:01:30+00:00
> There is huge difference in reality right now

Let's not confuse "huge differences" with huge emotional polarization over "small adjustments". Even on ICE tactics there aren't huge differences in method between Biden's and Trump's admins. The scales are different but the methods are the same, "administrative warrants" were upheld by SCOTUS and were/are used by both admins - as recently explained by IL Gov. Pritzker (D) on Jon Stewart's show.

> and completely asymmetric levels of radicalization.

I don't keep exacts stats but the numbers of politically-motivated murders seem to be very similar for both sides - it's a good argument in favor of rather symmetric levels of radicalization.
by tombert | 2025-09-14 20:02:50+00:00
I read papers depth-first recursively. I read the abstract and see how much I understand. If there's a lot of stuff I don't understand, I hop down to the references, find one of those papers, and try again. I do this until I get to a paper I more or less understand and bubble upwards.

I take pretty aggressive notes in Obsidian for each paper [1], which carries the benefit of being able to MediaWiki-tag definitions as I find them and build up a dictionary of terms I can reference.

I've never really seen the point of highlighting, it takes zero comprehension of the material to rub a marker over a page. I try my best to summarize each paragraph into a bullet. I figure that if I can summarize stuff accurately, I at least have some understanding of the material, and again this builds up a repository of notes I can read later (though I rarely do because I usually have a decent enough memory of the source material afterward).

Some day I will start sharing my archive of paper summaries for the world to not-actually-read, though I can't right now because they're kind of intermingled with personal notes that will take some time in order to decorrelate.

[1] I have actually been experimenting with Logseq lately, and I use Codex to synchronize back to Obsidian for the time being.
by pcrh | 2025-09-14 20:03:22+00:00
8,000 ft (2,400 meters) isn't particularly high. Millions of people live at that altitude. It's extremely common for people to go on a skiing vacation at that altitude or above, up to maybe 4,000 meters, and not need to take any particular precautions.

As to comments here about days resting while progressing to higher altitudes, such as in the Himalayas. A day or two will mostly result in adjustments in the water balance of your blood. It takes about 10 days to two weeks for your bone marrow to start producing additional red blood cells to compensate for the lower level of oxygen in the air.

High level altitude sickness is more complex and relates to multiple factors, including fluid balance, the health of one's vasculature and lungs, etc.

It is certainly the case that populations that have lived at high altitudes in the Himalayas or Andes for thousands of years have evolved adaptations that make such living easier.
by trimethylpurine | 2025-09-14 20:03:42+00:00
You've lost sight of the comment I responded to, in which the poster asserts, in so many words, that there can be no explanation for easing any restrictions other than for profit and authoritarianism, etc. Right? Clearly there is an explanation if you search for a few minutes. So I stand by my allegations of bias against that comment specifically.

Here, you've read and revised the approach to the issue. This last comment does not warrant any allegation of bias, and I make none about it.

The bigger picture is that both parties are interested in clean drinking water. I guess that's obvious to me, and I'm shocked that's not obvious to everyone. Look how many people on this thread actually believe that the Trump administration is literally trying to poison them. That's not crazy to you? It is to me.
by gjsman-1000 | 2025-09-14 20:05:59+00:00
Governments don't define encryption that way - they define encryption as the process of transforming information in a way that, ideally, an adversary cannot decode. Messages are unreadable if Russia hacked Vodafone, or China hacked Verizon, that kind of thing.

There's a significant difference there between a government's definition and Wikipedia's idealism. Or, even if they subscribed to the Wikipedia definition, they would say they have the legal right to be an authorized party.
by delusional | 2025-09-14 20:06:47+00:00
> Meme driven politics.

It's very much NOT meme driven. We're generally very sensitive to child abuse in Denmark, and even singular cases are usually enough to establish pretty wide bureaucratic systems.

Originally, she launched the "branding" push when they were talking about schools and daycare, but like all branding it spills out into other avenues. I have no doubt she weighs her job around children particularly important.

It's not at all a stretch to me to say that she probably genuinely wanted her party colleague, and CSAM enjoyer, caught faster, and I don't doubt that she believes this is the best way to do that.

That's not a "meme". That's policy driven by observation and factual cases.
by spankibalt | 2025-09-14 20:07:28+00:00
Ahaha, no. You're conversing with someone who grew up in one of the grayest places in the known universe (an East German city) and considers himself allergic to many (novelty) color schemes and combinations of this world; most beiges, off-whites, and grays OTOH are are beautiful (and relaxing) to me. This, of course, manifests in certain biases with regards to all things industrial design, e. g. case desgns, UIs, and so on.
by Forgeties79 | 2025-09-14 20:07:37+00:00
That is clearly not the assertion/part I am talking about, though I certainly have an opinion on that too.

He literally said the above quote I mentioned. It was sexist/racist. It was wrong. You can weigh in on it or not that’s your choice. But this man was not the saint the right is making him out to be. It’s flagrant revisionist history

Edit: I also forgot to respond to your Hortman comment. That does not matter. She and her husband were brutally murdered in their home for the crime of being democrats and holding office. How is that not worthy of national attention? How is that not the kind of political violence that the right allegedly cares about right now, despite the fact that right wingers are disproportionately the perpetrators of political violence over the last decade? If they had been Republicans we would still be hearing about it and you know it.

https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2025/09/12/is-radic...

And since this is a paywalled source, here’s the graph that illustrates the issue: https://www.economist.com/content-assets/images/20250920_WOC...
by Quekid5 | 2025-09-14 20:07:45+00:00
> We've just had a pretty prominent politician 7 years ago get convicted of being in possession of CSAM.

I don't disagree with your overall thesis about Danish politics at the moment, but... I think it's interesting that politicians are exempt from these monitoring schemes. So it wouldn't have prevented that guy from doing what he did. IIRC, Law Enforcement is also exempt, and they never get up to any of that, no sirree...

ANY time any legislation comes with exemptions for the people in power (legislature and law enforcement) you know it's time for extreme skepticism.

EDIT: It's just the inanity of it that has me despairing. Lobbyism at its finest (see my other comment).