MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by vkou | 2025-09-05 16:19:44+00:00
Until the federal government starts following its own laws there is zero point in states and cities engaging in good faith with it.

Good faith is a peace treaty, not a suicide pact, or opening your wallet to a conman, who goes back on every deal he makes.

(And this conman takes your tax money, and then instead of providing you the services that he is required to - by law, witholds it for reasons of pure spite and caprise. If he won't hold up his end of what he is required to, why should anyone else lift a finger to extend any courtesies to him?)
by mindslight | 2025-09-05 16:19:50+00:00
My comment wasn't really fleshed out, but my point is that it has to be something besides actual inequality because people can't perceive inequality directly. They can perceive their purchasing power and labor-selling power going down (could be all of society rather than equality). They can perceive inequality through trusted news media (NSA/security definition of can break you. I certainly do not mean trustworthy).

I am not trying to deny inequality as a driving factor. I do agree that inequality has been going up, I do agree that inequality is a society-destroying problem, and I do agree that this has created a fertile ground for the destructionist movement. I just think there needs to be a little more to the theory for it to make sense.
by jacquesm | 2025-09-05 16:20:00+00:00
The USA might as well put up a 'closed for business' by now.

Outside of manufacturing all around me there is talk of ditching Azure, Google and even AWS in spite of massive lock-in because the feeling that the USA is a trustworthy partner is completely gone. You can't just 'joke about invading Greenland' and expect everybody to move on as if it didn't happen. And I'm pretty sure that this isn't just local sample bias either, NL used to be pretty laid back when it came to silly details such as hosting providers and such.

How long until the .COM registry becomes fair game for the nationalists?
by Centigonal | 2025-09-05 16:20:20+00:00
Doing all the work in the classroom is more equitable for students who don't have comfortable and quiet places to do work at home.

It's harder for those who have additional accommodations at home, but we could arrange for those accommodations to be made in the school, and those who have accommodations at home are in a better position to advocate for getting what they need than those with rough or busy home lives.
by PleasureBot | 2025-09-05 16:20:21+00:00
An integral part of authoritarianism is cruelty. How else can you assert that you have unalienable authority over a group of people? If compliance with authority is easy and painless, you don't really know if people are just acquiescing but silently resisting or not resisting yet but could if they wanted to. By enacting cruelty on others you put them in a position where they absolutely would resist if they could, and thus you demonstrate to the world that people cannot resist your authority.
by omnicognate | 2025-09-05 16:20:36+00:00
It's a terrible attitude and I agree that sort of thing shouldn't be (and generally isn't) tolerated for long in a professional environment.

That said the article is full of technical detail and voices several serious shortcomings of protobuf that I've encountered myself, along with suggestions as to how it could be done better. It's a shame it comes packaged with unwarranted personal attacks.
by adam_arthur | 2025-09-05 16:20:58+00:00
The US nuked Japan in the 1940s and only a short few years later were close allies.

Similarly, Germany was the de facto enemy of the Ally aligned world in the 40s and only a few short decades later best friends with most.

You can identify countless similar atrocities in US history after which relations stabilized within a few years.

Most in life are short term oriented and it's rare that these things produce lasting effects on perception.

Does anyone care or even remotely think about what Bush did as president 20 years ago? Some politically oriented and historically minded folks yes, 99% no.

They really have to be long lasting and persistent transgressions to produce generational distrust e.g. Japan invading China/Korea many times over the last few hundred years.

However the new gen seems far less concerned about this too.

Given Trump's larger than life character/ego/presence, it's more likely that anything he does will be attributed to him instead of the country as a whole. Which makes his actions perhaps even less impactful than a more neutral presenting president doing the same.
by jonathrg | 2025-09-05 16:21:30+00:00
The generated types in go are horrible to work with. You can't store instances of them anywhere, or pass them by value, because they contain a bunch of state and pointers (including a [0]sync.Mutex just to explicitly prohibit copying). So you have to pass around pointers at all times, making ownership and lifetime much more complicated than it needs to be. A message definition like this

message AppLogMessage { sint32 Value1 = 1; double Value2 = 2; }

becomes

type Example struct { state protoimpl.MessageState xxx_hidden_Value1 int32 xxx_hidden_Value2 float64 xxx_hidden_unknownFields protoimpl.UnknownFields sizeCache protoimpl.SizeCache }

For [place of work] where we use protobuf I ended up making a plugin to generate structs that don't do any of the nonsense (essentially automating Option 1 in the article):

type ExamplePOD struct { Value1 int32 Value2 float64 }

with converters between the two versions.
by impure-aqua | 2025-09-05 16:21:31+00:00
Unless you need the GPIO pins it is likely a better choice to go with one of the many x86 mini PCs on Amazon, although you need to ensure it is not totally no-name.

I got a GMKtec G5 which is about ~3"x3"x2", has an Intel N97 CPU, 12GB of RAM, and a 512GB SSD (upgraded to a 2TB NVMe disk). No need to buy an additional power adapter (included, it's Type-C), HDMI adapters, or case/fan, either. I think it was about £110 with next-day shipping from Amazon.

It has remarkable performance; I tried GNOME on NixOS and it felt instantly responsive for all general purpose desktop use (web browsing, vscodium with my linting extensions, etc). The only area of my everyday workflow in which it clearly fell behind my M1 Max MacBook Pro was in Rust compilation which is obviously expected - I was just shocked how close it was for everything outside of that. This is in huge contrast to Raspberry Pis which suck to use graphically, even with the Pi 5.

It has happily been sitting on my desk running Forgejo, Mastodon, Vaultwarden, and acting as a personal storage server with that 2TB drive for the last ~6 months and I never even hear the fan. Sits at 0.1 load average, despite Mastodon with this many relays previously eating up the contabo VPS' CPU I was using quite handily.
by flail | 2025-09-05 16:22:40+00:00
Since I haven't mentioned the context in the article, it is a small agency with a customer target of early-stage (ideally earliest-stage) product startups.

We have literally one half-hour-long sync meeting a week. The rest is as lightweight as possible, typically averaging below 10 minutes daily with clients (when all the decisions happen on the fly).

I've worked in the corpo world, too, and it is anything but.

We do use vibe coding a lot in prototyping. Depending on the context, we sometimes have a lot of AI-agent-generated code, too.

What's more, because of working on multiple projects, we have a fairly decent pool of data points. And we don't see much of speed improvement from a perspective of a project (I wrote more on it here: https://brodzinski.com/2025/08/most-underestimated-factor-es...).

However, developers sure report their perception of being more productive. We do discuss how much these perceptions are grounded in reality, though. See this: https://metr.org/blog/2025-07-10-early-2025-ai-experienced-o... and this: https://substack.com/home/post/p-172538377

So, I don't think I'm biased toward bureaucratic environments, where developers code in MS Word rather than VS Code.

But these are all just one dimension of the discussion. The other is a simple question: are there ways of validating ideas before we turn them into implemented features/products?

The answer has always been a wholehearted "yes".

If development pace were all that counted, Googles and Amazons of this world would be beating the crap out of every aspiring startup in any niche the big tech cared about, even remotely. And that simply is not happening.

Incumbents are known to be losing ground, and old-school behemoths that still kick butts (such as IBM) do so because they continuously reinvent their businesses.
by schiffern | 2025-09-05 16:22:48+00:00
TLDR Godwin's Law except every action becomes the act of murder.

Do I really need to say that ecological impacts and murder are very different things?

The funny part is your "murderer in the next town over" example is almost exactly how cap-and-trade works (plus a price mechanism), which is the most effective system yet devised to reduce smog from power plants. So in this area of public policy we already let off the "murderer" (eyeroll) with that excuse, and rightfully so...
by mbreese | 2025-09-05 16:23:05+00:00
One of the major use cases was multi-user HPC systems. Because they can be complicated, it’s not uncommon for bioinformatics data analysis programs to be distributed as containers. Large HPC clusters are multi-tennant by nature, so running these containers needs to be rootless.

There are existing tools that fill this gap (Singularity/Apptainer). But, there is always friction when you have to use a specialized tool versus the default. For me, this is a core usecase for rootless containers.

For the reduced feature set we need from containers in bioinformatics, rootless is pretty straightforward. You could get largely the same benefits from chroots.

Where I think the issues start is when you start to use networking, subuids, or other features that require root-level access. At this level, rootless because a tedious exercise in configuration that probably isn’t worth the effort. The problem is, the features I need will be different from the features you need. Satisfying all users in a secure was may not be worth it.
by krapp | 2025-09-05 16:23:07+00:00
> I think it's fascinating that both sides seem to think we're a stone's throw from the apocalypse.. which very much seems to be projected onto the voter base on purpose..

Projected by whom, by what means, and to what end?

Consider that both sides may have legitimate reasons to be concerned with this term that didn't apply to Trump's first term, and that what you see isn't simply some form of mass-manipulation or "projection onto the voter base."
by ploxiln | 2025-09-05 16:23:33+00:00
The Pi 3 B+ is still available for $35, it's what I still use on occasion - as an ad-hoc networked sensor, or an LED or switch controller, or an weird eeprom programmer ...

Sure I could use an arduino in many cases, but the Pi running linux can be very convenient, with bash or regular python or even small unix C utilities (which I can tweak and re-compile right on the Pi!)
by crazygringo | 2025-09-05 16:23:44+00:00
Perhaps I was a bit strict, but Wikipedia is mainly meant to cite secondary sources.

When they explain where primary sources are allowed, they emphasize they "should be used carefully":

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Identifying_and_usin...

Also "Wikipedia articles should be based on reliable, published secondary sources, and to a lesser extent, on tertiary sources and primary sources."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research...

The general idea is that primary sources have not been judged as notable by anyone. The fact that a secondary source considers it notable to include a primary source is a strong signal that the information has passed a first, minimal bar for inclusion in an encyclopedia.

And when primary sources are cited, Wikipedia is exceptionally clear that they must be cited only for verifiable statements of fact, not interpretations or synthesis. That's what secondary sources are for.
by PleasureBot | 2025-09-05 16:23:48+00:00
Its unprecedented in modern times for a nation state to act this way. We declared to the world that we think we have the right to kill foreign nationals in international waters so long as there is "suspicion" of crime. The people on that boat were not even given a chance to explain themselves or surrender. Its monstrous behavior by this administration. Not even countries like North Korea or Russia operate this way.
by ShakataGaNai | 2025-09-05 16:23:52+00:00
Train rolling jokes aside, that makes sense... until it doesn't work.

A traffic control system, the thing that makes sure all trains are in known locations, safely spaced, etc.... might be necessarily centralized. There isn't really a "rolling release" you can do for a single system.

Should they have a separate test system for release before "production", sure. Do they? No idea. Is it identical to production? Clearly not. How does the saying go....

> Everybody has a testing environment. Some people are lucky enough enough to have a totally separate environment to run production.
by nkozyra | 2025-09-05 16:23:56+00:00
If there's a dichotomy that I can't really reconcile politically, it's the fundamental idea that people coming here is bad. That we cannot allow anyone else in. We can't even allow things from other countries to come here.

The effects of this insular isolationism can only be explained by simplicity that doesn't hold up in reality: things will be more prosperous for us if we keep what we have to ourselves. But in truth growth is growth. To build prosperity, we need more production, which means more people. Perhaps your share gets bigger, but the pot gets smaller.
by milkshakes | 2025-09-05 16:24:10+00:00
well, for one, "datacenters instead of paychecks" is nonsensical. openai doesn't operate their own datacenters, they in fact write checks to people who do, who in turn write their own checks to their employees.

it sounds like you don't believe datacenters are "useful", either. that's a pretty hot take IMO.
by ninetyninenine | 2025-09-05 16:24:43+00:00
Thanks for stalking me like a creeper. I think that act alone is signal you have the most issues. I'm not going to stalk your comment history but I wouldn't be surprised if you do shit like this on the regular. Most people just don't have time to stalk someones comment history... especially if the thread didn't have to anything to DO with them.

Can you not stalk me and not insult me to my face? also please mind your own business.
by munificent | 2025-09-05 16:25:23+00:00
> It requires network consensus.

No, it requires network control. Consensus among a large number of independent participants who agree on a change is one way to have that control.

But another way is to have a minority of participants that control a disproportionately large fraction of mining decide what to do.

The history of crypto shows that over time, miners tend to consolidate until eventually you have a small number of miners who significant leverage over the ledger. None of that should be surprising: economy of scale is economics 101 and certainly applies to miners who buy and run hardware in bulk.

> Non-fiat currency is the most egalitarian system possible.

Egalitarianism is a property of human behavior and social systems, not the hardware that humans may or may not be using as intended.
by pizlonator | 2025-09-05 16:25:28+00:00
The JVM byte code situation isn’t a great example because that was a series of deliberate design choices for lots of complex reasons. And, the JVM absolutely can guarantee memory safety at the bytecode level. It’s just working with a slightly more dynamic type system than Java source.

What would happen if you tried to do PCC for InvisiCaps and FUGC is that it would ultimately constrain what optimizations are possible, because the optimizer would only be able to pick from the set of tricks that it could express a proof for within whatever proof system we picked

Totally not the end of the world.

Do I think this an interesting thing to actually do? I’m not sure. It’s certainly not the most interesting thing to do with Fil-C right now
by allanrbo | 2025-09-05 16:25:40+00:00
Sometimes you are integrating with system that already use proto though. I recently wrote a tiny, dependency-free, practical protobuf (proto3) encoder/decoder. For those situations where you need just a little bit of protobuf in your project, and don't want to bother with the whole proto ecosystem of codegen and deps: https://github.com/allanrbo/pb.py
by flail | 2025-09-05 16:25:44+00:00
If only "trying things" always equaled "developing things". There's a whole body of knowledge (under the Lean Startup umbrella) that argues otherwise.

Do we always have to build it before we know that it will work (or, in 9 cases out of 10, that it will not work)?

Even more so, do we have to build a fully-fledged version of it to know?

If yes, then I agree, development is the bottleneck.
by CRConrad | 2025-09-05 16:26:38+00:00
> First, there is the question of the mythology of the author. Would Shakespeare be himself if he had an AI ghost write his books? Would we care as much?

Idunno... Would Homer? Shakespeare is one thing; we have at least some biographical detail on him. (And even then, quite a few people seem to believe he didn't write the works attributed to him.) But "Homer - the author of the Iliad and the Odyssée" is so unknown to us that experts argue about whether he even existed, whether he was one person or several, and so on. We know him only through his (or, eh, "his") works. Now there you can talk about "the mythology of the author"; that's "mythological", indeed! :-)

For all we know, Homer — or "Homer" — could be an AI! Yeah, sure, very far-fetched and unlikely. But let's say our descendants in the 26th (or 387th) century invent time travel (or their AIs do...), and an AI goes to bronze-age (or was it early iron-age?) Greece and plants these stories, perhaps posing as a person called "Homer"[1], and they survive to this day attributed to this possibly-existing-or-possibly-fictitious person, and are the stories we know as "the Iliad" and "the Odyssée".

Would that change anything about how we percieve, or should percieve, the stories? If so, what and how? Does "an AI" differ from "person or persons unknown" in this scenario?

___

[1]: Or it's a flesh-and-blood person using the moniker that does the actual posing-as-"Homer", but he only peddles the stories an AI wrote for him in his home period; whatever.
by giardini | 2025-09-05 16:26:39+00:00
gjsman-1000 says "Whether with constant distractions in Windows 11, building unnecessarily deadly weapons at Northrop Grumman, or automating the livelihoods of millions of “inferior” jobs."

"unnecessarily deadly"?

I had no idea that it was possible to measure degrees of dead: she's dead, they're dead, we're all dead, etc. - I thought it was the same "dead" for everyone.

Also, interesting but ambiguous sentence structure.

Is this an offshoot of LLMs that I've overlooked?
by tojumpship | 2025-09-05 16:27:03+00:00
Foremost, I personally appreciate the effort you've given for this comment and your fight for your beliefs in general.

Although, handling it purely pragmatically, there is no other concise source of information as vast as Wikipedia's concerning so many facets of life as well as sciences that is far enough from feelings' reach that is pretty well-written as the only possible bias present is also factually incorrect (as opposed to ideological topics).

I understand that supporting and reading articles from a source which you know is blatantly lying or otherwise obstructive or manipulative on other topics is a difficult undertaking but we literally have no other option . There is no war but the war against illiteracy to be won. Education, information and intelligence is man's best friend and until a better alternative arises for the masses (e.g scientific articles do not count as an alternative, Britannica is only in English) the one we have should we stuck with, and its quite well managed too.

Bias in itself is eternal, and holding any entity to a standart so high is illogical at best in my view. If there was no Wiki, would you think the many blog pages filling its space would be absent of the very bias you're talking about, but worse, would they have had any factual backing?
by imtringued | 2025-09-05 16:27:44+00:00
>The solution is as follows:

> * Make all fields in a message required. This makes messages product types.

Meanwhile in the capnproto FAQ:

>How do I make a field “required”, like in Protocol Buffers?

>You don’t. You may find this surprising, but the “required” keyword in Protocol Buffers turned out to be a horrible mistake.

I recommend reading the rest of the FAQ [0], but if you are in a hurry: Fixed schema based protocols like protobuffers do not let you remove fields like self describing formats such as JSON. Removing fields or switching them from required to optional is an ABI breaking change. Nobody wants to update all servers and all clients simultaneously. At that point, you would be better off defining a new API endpoint and deprecating the old one.

The capnproto faq article also brings up the fact that validation should be handled on the application level rather than the ABI level.

[0] https://capnproto.org/faq.html
by dktalks | 2025-09-05 16:27:59+00:00
No, you don't run the Docker containers run in OrbStack, you can spin up an Alpine instance and run all docker instance on it.

The benefit is that, Alpine has access to all your local and network drives so you can use them. You can sandbox them as well. It's not a big learning curve, just a good VM with access to all drives but isolated to local only.
by pingLost | 2025-09-05 16:28:05+00:00
>> ..this means the moment your growth takes too long/stagnates by whatever _arbitrary_ metric:

you get HR's glossy `Exit Packet' with a cover of a pristine chartered white catamaran on the translucent aquamarine Carribbean in a palm treed cove, afloat with bikini babes lounging on deck, five minutes to fill your cardboard box, and manhandled by two security wide-shouldered bulls squeezing your arms to your sides gripped under your forearms, marching you down the aisle with rubber-knecking wide-eyed heads watching you repeatedly slip, fall forward, the experienced bulls lowering your arms to regain your shoes' purchase with the carpet, hurriedly packing you into the elevator with silent ignominious stares and hushed whispers of those packed in around you, then past hot Tanya at Reception in front of every Tom, Dick, Irene, and Harry, out the main revolving glass door entrance, into the overcast dishwater grey and miserable wind blown wet in truth is Seattle, to the sidewalk, left at the curb -furthest from proper and successful glitterati as possible.

All double-time haste, signalling to everyone get this despicable loser/criminal POS off the property, fast.

Its over, you're done. Sooner than you thought possible, you're freezing in a tent wasting days into months: tailing-downward foodbank boxes, the TIDE(tm) pee-bottle, those el-cheapo dirty gloves with the tips cut off, dirty layered thriftstore fleeces, its under filthy roaring I-5 for you pal, and your ilk of dangerous insane addict-crazed zombies screaming outside your hideous blue-tarped tent, and where's the knife.

The answer to the fundamental question of your entire existence and net worth has reduced to simply ask: "How do I best empty my bowels"?

ICEstapo hunter/killers gunning for you, to flush you offshore unseen and forgotten forever. You better run, you better run your ass off. Why didn't you study harder all those wasted years?!

Welcome to Sam Altman's Club.
by dathinab | 2025-09-05 16:28:23+00:00
In addition to rootless podman / root docker there are some other options:

- rootless docker, works fine, not fully sure why it's not the default by now (I do have issues form time to time but I had the same issues with root docker)

- rootfull podman

- running docker/podman daemon as a different and non root user (but have fun trying to mount anything !?)