MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by sporkxrocket | 2025-09-18 00:54:54+00:00
The people who have been very vocal about forcing US ownership of TikTok have also been very, very open about their Zionism on social media. A16z has been pushing for this hard since the start of the genocide. Zionists blame "TikTok" for their opposition. They even call the younger people who don't support Israel the "TikTok Generation".

This along with the consolidation of other US media assets under Zionist control, is very much about Israel and attempting to gain a monopoly on the media.
by rvz | 2025-09-18 00:55:41+00:00
This is very impressive for a first version of the AI glasses from Meta.

Zuck really has cracked this one.

To Downvoters:

Give credit where credit is due.

I think you are going to realize in a few years why tens of billions was poured into Reality Labs and Oculus.

Version 2 or 3 of these glasses is going to set Meta ahead of the rest (except at least Apple).
by Daub | 2025-09-18 00:55:42+00:00
The most significant reason that Blender is in its current position is because of the significant refactoring it undertook starting in version 2.5 I believe. 7 years brewing in the pot! It cant have been easy... but the outcome (Blender 2.8) is when we sersiolsy starting thinking about using it in our uni.
by stevefan1999 | 2025-09-18 00:56:21+00:00
That's supposedly WASI, an interface specifically designated for system programming use, and that's where it implements part of the POSIX support including pthread.

OTOH you still need to start a wasm runtime first, then import the WASI module into the wasm host.

P.S.: used to tinker with wasmtime and wasmi to add wasm support to my half abandoned deno clone ;) I learned this the hard way
by raspasov | 2025-09-18 00:57:06+00:00
I think "hasn't seen before" is a bit of an overstatement. Sure, the problem is new in the literal sense that it does exist verbatim elsewhere, but arguably, any competition problem is hardly novel: they are all some permutation of problems that exist and have been solved before: pathfinding, optimization, etc. I don't think anyone is pretending to break new scientific ground in 5 hours.
by sothatsit | 2025-09-18 00:57:49+00:00
I tend to think that the reason people over-index on complex use-cases for LLMs is actually reliability, not a lack of interest in boring projects.

If an LLM can solve a complex problem 50% of the time, then that is still very valuable. But if you are writing a system of small LLMs doing small tasks, then even 1% error rates can compound into highly unreliable systems when stacked together.

The cost of LLMs occasionally giving you wrong answers is worth it for answers to harder tasks, in a way that it is not worth it for smaller tasks. For those smaller tasks, usually you can get much closer to 100% reliability, and more importantly much greater predictability, with hand-engineered code. This makes it much harder to find areas where small LLMs can add value for small boring tasks. Better auto-complete is the only real-world example I can think of.
by bediger4000 | 2025-09-18 00:57:54+00:00
I'm not denying what you've observed there, but how does this square up with cancel culture is bad, as we've heard at length from any number of moralizers, including many HN posters and the NYT editorial board. Was I to understand those moralizers as having said that cancelling conservatives was bad, but cancelling the more liberal is at least ok?
by drnick1 | 2025-09-18 00:57:58+00:00
Google not having access to your email is a huge privacy benefit. Even with email becoming less important, most online services still rely on email for sign up and things such as password recovery. You probably also still receive email receipts for flights and online purchases. These are all data points that I would rather Google/Apple/Microsoft not have.

Besides privacy, running your own server means you can create as many mailboxes/aliases as you like. I give each website/company a distinct alias; this allows me to revoke an alias that becomes problematic, e.g. due to spam. There are no storage limits other than those dictated by your hardware, no maximum attachment size, etc. I am immune to "terms and conditions" changing overnight that suddenly shrink my storage or put features such as IMAP access behind a paywall.
by kzalesak | 2025-09-18 00:58:07+00:00
I am surprised nobody mentioned the Qidi printers. They are the perfect balance between tinkerability and reliability (but see below - QA varies), and have open firmware. They are the only ones that currently compete with Bambu in high-temperature materials. These will outperform PC/Nylon and can also print advanced stuff as PPS, especially on the new Q2.

Now, for their QA - it is not on par with Prusa or Bambu, however, there are a few tips to avoid the pitfalls. 1. If buying the Plus 4, buy the US version of possible. The EU models are older units with a faulty part. 2. Buy from places that offer returns. If the printer is faulty, you can always return it 3. If something breaks, document and send to support. Expect free replacement parts shipped within a week.

By following the above, you will get an extremely capable printer at a fraction of a cost of a Bambu, with offline modes, open source FW a great community and hotend capabilities that are virtually unparalleled and venture into engineering grade machines.

Happy printing :)
by markoman | 2025-09-18 00:58:34+00:00
Except that Kimmel's job was speech. He had a microphone -- and depended upon that (supposedly God-given) freedom of speech to perform that job. If he lost that job due to something that right didn't guarantee, then I'd understand. His dismissal's cause had nothing to do with a failure on his part. Instead we now have the government, specifically concerned with his criticisms of it, effectuating this block of Kimmel's speech and thereby ending his job. The government is supposed to guarantee your right to criticize it. What happened here?
by baobun | 2025-09-18 00:59:55+00:00
> What causes very active discussions like this to drop off the front page so quickly?

Supposedly posts with very high comments/upvote ratio are automatically classified as toxic and downranked.

That combined with random users flagging it, presumably.

In any case, seems more algorithmic than editorial (which is not to say that the latter never occurs around here in general)
by tptacek | 2025-09-18 01:00:00+00:00
I don't know that the FCC is what is scaring anyone so much as the FTC/DOJ; Nexstar, the largest local affiliate operator in the country, is working on a huge merger, and pulled Kimmel independently. I'm sure they're all getting galactic-scale complaints about this.

I get why this is all activating and like I guess I agree, it's obviously bad, but it's also really stupid. These are programs written for middle-aged suburban professionals that air primarily to elderly customers who still watch linear television. Kimmel would have drastically more reach on an indie show online (who would you rather be, just in terms of reach, Kimmel or Hinchcliffe?).

The fact is it's not Kimmel's air, it's corporate air. Late-night hosts getting fucked over for crossing the interests of their corporate owners is a very old story; one of the great sitcoms of all time is based entirely off the premise (in fact, two of the great sitcoms of all time are).

Kimmel's got a good writing team. He's talented. He should have gotten off this dead time slot a long time ago.
by Macha | 2025-09-18 01:00:01+00:00
Honestly I'm willing to bet that the contacts/account managers at Google genuinely didn't know that easyprivacy had added their view tracking to the blocklist, and reached out to some people internally who's job is implementing youtube and not anti-adblock features who correctly said they didn't change anything, and would have no reason to know that easyprivacy had changed anything.

Then the AMs just issue vague statements to the youtubers as it feels more like saving face than admitting they have no idea
by hollerith | 2025-09-18 01:00:13+00:00
Your comment seems to rely on the premise that the only alternative to everybody's acting 100% selfish 100% of the time is everybody's (or at least my) giving up their property rights and privacy.

I wasn't suggesting anything like that or even trying to pressure anyone into not being selfish: I merely pointed out that a sentence on the internet[1] would be untrue if anyone cares about Bambu's policies and practices for non-selfish reasons.

[1] "none of the supposed business practices/privacy concerns amount to anything tangible"
by lmm | 2025-09-18 01:00:27+00:00
I think that like it or not, Docker has managed to win mindshare in a way that no single distro's package management ever did. Application developers could never get away with publishing only RPMs or only debs (and whether the same deb would work on Debian and Ubuntu was always a risky question), but everyone runs Docker; even the alternatives like Podman or Moby feel the need to be compatible with existing Docker packages.
by alsetmusic | 2025-09-18 01:00:40+00:00
My comment was slightly too late to get migrated, so apologies for reposting it:

And yet, my mother, who voted for this admin, would stand by the statement that we live in the free'est country in the world.

The truly horrific thing is that it's death by a thousand cuts, rather than the huge tyrannical violation that would cause people to stream out into the streets for change.
by nibblenum | 2025-09-18 01:00:51+00:00
"our years ago Tracey McNiven, a Scottish woman in her mid-30s, caught a bad chest infection that left her with a persistent cough that refused to subside, even after medication. A few months later strange symptoms started to appear. McNiven noticed numbness spreading through her legs and began to feel that their movement was out of her control. When she w"...
by yndoendo | 2025-09-18 01:01:00+00:00
I wouldn't call it hallucination. It would be coherent stories that fit their belief system and allows them to short their brain. [0]

Coherent stories that are blatantly false are great tools in misinformation and social engineering. [1]

[0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thinking,_Fast_and_Slow [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Art_of_Deception
by JumpCrisscross | 2025-09-18 01:01:01+00:00
> No American gets to vote on this and those who thought they were voting against it actually voted for the person most likely to enable it. Hence zero sovereignty

You're mixing up sovereignty with direct democracy.

We're a republic. We have total sovereignty when it comes to geopolitics. None of that requires Americans voting on foreign policy issues, which in reality, given even informed Americans' international literacy, would be horrific.

> 1% is absolutely huge with regards to a GDP (money spent)

But easy enough to replace, even solely with domestic resources.

> you need to throw in all the other money the US spends on the Middle East

This is nonsense. One, we're not abandoning the Gulf for a variety of financial and geostrategic reasons. Two, even if we do, that's an opportunity for Israel as an emerging regional hegemonic.

> I’m unlikely to change anyone’s mind on this

Wouldn't have expected otherwise. These discussions can still be interesting for us, as you mentioned, and for others.
by seec | 2025-09-18 01:01:39+00:00
I don't know how people like him can come up with so much ideological bullshit that is very obviously proved wrong just by observing other species or consulting history.

If any of it was wrong not only, we would just not breed and select animals for specific traits but pretty much most of our civilisation wouldn't even exist as it does.

We got there precisely by selecting and using animals as tools and food security. Our farm animals are quite passive, precisely because we selected that trait.

There are some people who pay over 30K€ for the breeding of a specific horse in an attempt to create a race winner; and then we have guys like this, supposedly smart but who keep spiting nonsense and even pretend to have the authority of science behind him.

The evidence is right under everyone's nose. It is extremely hard to "prove" in a "scientific" (at some points statistics have too much interpretation behind them to be meaningful) way but anyone who is completely blinded by ideologies.

People who wouldn't be considered "smart" here have an old saying: "the apple doesn't fall far from the tree". They may not be smart but have infinitely more wisdom and what they say might be true more often than the "smart" peoples.
by waterTanuki | 2025-09-18 01:01:54+00:00
Something somewhere needs to change because the status quo just isn't working. Yes, we can cheer on the benefit of OIDC tokens and zero-trust solutions in CI pipelines on HN all we want, but the fact is there's a significant number of library developers out there with millions of package downloads per week that will refuse to do anything about security until they're compromised or npm blocks them from publishing until they do.

And then there's other non-sensical proposals like spelunking deep into projects some which could be over a decade old and just rip out all the dependencies until there's nothing but a standard library is left. Look, I'm all for a better std lib, I think reducing the number of dependencies we have is good. But just saying "you should reduce dependencies" will do nothing concrete to fix the problem which already exists, because it's much easier said than done.

So either tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of developers stop using npm, and everyone refactors their projects to add more code and strip dependencies, or npm starts enforcing things like 2FA and OIDC for package developers with over X number of weekly downloads, and blocks publishing for those that don't follow the new security rules. I think it's clear which solution is more practical to implement. The only other option is for npm to completely lose its reputation and then we wind up with XKCD 927 again.
by ncallaway | 2025-09-18 01:02:11+00:00
I know there’s already been a fair amount of discussion on this topic, but I appreciate Masnick’s takes on 1A issues. I thought this commentary did a good job focusing on how the government threatened individual parties involved to obtain this outcome, which to me is a significant factor in separating this from other firings.

I generally believe in the marketplace of ideas, and if a network doesn’t want to carry a particular voice, they are within their own 1A rights to fire people. I think this case clearly crosses the line into government censorship via direct threat.
by brailsafe | 2025-09-18 01:02:34+00:00
> In the past, before radio and recorded music, people daydreamed or sang to accomplish the same goal.

Call it pain avoidance or dopamine stacking, they're probably both apt, but there's a difference in degree between the level of control and personalization and dependence between humming a tune or listening to a stationary giant radio and the current state of not being able to do anything remotely unstimulating or arduous like standing on a train or going to sleep without a distraction; how normal it is seems like logical fallacy, It's also pretty normal for people to spend 5 hours a day looking at their phones, not have made any friends in adulthood outside school, or have any romantic prospects.

I find it funny/depressing that I've been asked at least 3 times why I don't wear headphones at the gym. If you can pull a lever or click a button and take your mind of something you've never let become less painful, how important is the distinction?
by Rudybega | 2025-09-18 01:02:51+00:00
If we develop a system that can:

- compress (in a relatively recoverable way) the entire domain of human knowledge

- interpolate across the entire domain of human knowledge

- draw connections or conclusions that haven't previously been stated explicitly

- verify or disprove those conclusions or connections

- update its internal model based on that (further expanding the domain it can interpolate within)

Then I think we're cooking with gasoline. I guess the question becomes whether those new conclusions or connections result in a convergent or divergent increase in the number of new conclusions and connections the model can draw (e.g. do we understand better the domains we already know or does updating the model with these new conclusions/connections allow us to expand the scope of knowledge we understand to new domains).
by Vaslo | 2025-09-18 01:03:06+00:00
Nah, reality is even simpler than your conspiracy. These late night guys are money losers and they are looking for a reason to drop them. The fact that they nightly insult 80 million potential viewers with their arrogant and unneeded leftist opinions is bad for business. It doesn’t matter how Jimmy and his leftist writer feel, that’s their business they should keep out of the job. They need to maximize shareholder value by putting on the best show possible.

It’s not about “Jimmy”, it’s about his audience.
by rTX5CMRXIfFG | 2025-09-18 01:03:09+00:00
What industry standard are you talking about? We literally have large financial institutions making more money than you running their systems on freaking COBOL. It _is_ common in the industry for organizations to hold off on newer technology because refactoring to the coolest new tech is too costly. Even Cocoa frameworks aren’t obsolete just yet, and it’s unlikely to be so for a long time.

Everything you just said is a dishonest excuse so that you can play with a new library using your company’s money and while letting them incur the additional risk of breakage or tech debt. Nothing is stopping you today from using Core Data to build an observable model or to partially adopt SwiftData just in the functionality that it can sufficiently cover.
by davesque | 2025-09-18 01:03:49+00:00
> Crowder being hated by a huge percentage of the population, which was a quip that had no relevance

The man makes a living by antagonizing people who don't hold his views, and that's not relevant to how effective he will be at making a reasonable argument?

> The left is basically saying I hate Charlie Kirk he deserved to die, and by the way it was your own guy.

No, the "left" is not saying this. You're assuming it. For any such over-the-top comment you find on Xitter, or wherever, one can easily find an equally over-the-top right-leaning comment. What does this say? That maybe social media isn't the best way to discover what the average person actually thinks.

> He was dating a trans person, the bullets had markings bella ciao (that was also sung in disrespect at CK vigils by the way) and his dad and other family members have confirmed he was radicalized left.

All relevant details that make it hard to pin this entirely on the far-right. But he was also raised in a MAGA, gun-toting family. That makes it hard to pin this entirely on the far-left. Did his personal background make it easier for him to resort to gun violence to make his point? Could it be that his conservative family are disgusted by his relationship with a transgender person, and might choose to cast his views as being "radical left" so as to avoid any embarrassment to themselves? Yes, all these things could be. And we may know more in the days to come. For now, nobody knows. And it's very hard for liberal-minded people to feel like emphasizing the shooter's left-leaning political views isn't a veiled call to retaliatory violence from political leaders that thrive off of conflict.
by mrtesthah | 2025-09-18 01:03:51+00:00
I see nothing wrong with people acquiring a left-wing political lens as a result of their own independent thought process (which, by the way, has nothing to do with universities, regardless of what the right-wing talking points you're referencing say; the shooter went to a trade school).

And in any case, a significant majority of political violence is caused by right-wing extremists. Of course the DOJ just deleted that report because it was inconvenient to their narrative.

https://people.com/department-of-justice-quietly-deletes-stu...
by ProllyInfamous | 2025-09-18 01:04:35+00:00
I edited my above-comment to better incorporate multiple comedian's POV on off-color humor ("x-isms," to use PG's terminology)

>Where was the joke?

If any comedian's attempt at any "joke," however tactless, led to any two+ people sitting down and having discussion of real-world realities... then I think the jokester has exceled professionally (honestly I haven't seen this Kimmel clip; I always just remember him as black-face-guy from 90s Comedy Central™ — which was as appropriate/funny/accepted as Downey in Tropic Thunder).

So in this particular case, Kimmel continues his professionalism as Jester.
by daemonologist | 2025-09-18 01:04:37+00:00
Two failed live demos (the LLM cooking instructions and later the video call). Keynote was a bit hard to watch overall.

However, both of those were kind of old news - LLMs are always unreliable and the video call is regular technology that will probably be fixed eventually. The wrist/tendon interface though is quite cool and seemed to work reasonably well.
by infecto | 2025-09-18 01:05:26+00:00
Again that number is inclusive of retirement accounts, hard to say much without knowing the breakdown but we do know $8k is the closet cash number. I would suspect the majority of the rest are in retirement accounts. Sure bonds and stocks are liquid but not like cash is. Using Fred is not that useful for these type of exercises as I don’t think those datapoints do a great job on topics like this.

So I don’t see what you are trying to point out. Most surveys I have seen put something like a quarter of Americans without any emergency savings.
by hn_throwaway_99 | 2025-09-18 01:06:01+00:00
Man, the sheer transactionality that guides these people's lives is pretty disgusting to me. Granted, you probably don't get to be a billionaire unless you are pretty transactional, but I am kind of thankful that the vapid hollowness of these billionaires (despite always cloaking their rapaciousness in some sort of larger societal purpose) has been laid bare over the past few years.
by aerostable_slug | 2025-09-18 01:06:23+00:00
I'm frankly surprised they didn't build in some ability to flexibly apply guardrails. You'd have to think a product manager brought up the desirability to have variably locked down systems for different end users, this being an obvious application.

Did people decide that they'd design in lines that can't be crossed and everyone just went with it? Must have made for some interesting conversations.
by replwoacause | 2025-09-18 01:06:41+00:00
I think I have a stronger opinion on what happens when anyone can spin up an “app” without technical know how. I’m not surprised in the least by the clones given that anyone can talk an “app” into existence. The quality of that app is another thing entirely. In other words, I’m less worried about clones and more about the integrity of software engineering in general.