MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by toast0 | 2025-09-06 17:05:56+00:00
The improvements here are likely irrelevant for last mile. If hollow core fully replaces solid core, last mile deployments would use it, but saving 33% of latency in a fiber that's almost certainly less than 5 ms long isn't cost effective if there is any economic cost. The reduction in loss also doesn't provide a benefit for short runs. If there's an improvement in splicing, that might be useful for last mile, if splicing is harder, then it's less likely to be adopted.

On medium and long distance runs, it will provide a lot of benefits. Reducing latency on a cross country link is palpable; reducing latency on a shorter link like LA to SF is valuable too, because some routes have many of those. Reducing the number of amplifiers needed will be apprechiated by cable operators as well, fewer points of failure, likely a lower power budget, etc.

It may obsolete existing long haul fiber. But installed fiber will still be useful even if there's better fiber that could be installed... And existing fiber will be useful for redundancy and additional capacity even if there's better fiber on the same route.
by rootusrootus | 2025-09-06 17:05:57+00:00
This is very regional, and I suspect is more of a problem for SoCal that most anywhere else. I've been driving EVs since 2019 and I have experienced a line exactly one time.

I would agree, though, that if you do run into a situation where you have to wait, the current system does not deal with it well. They need a better way to fairly manage a queue if it forms.
by quantummagic | 2025-09-06 17:06:12+00:00
It sounds to me like he was just apologizing for pulling a number out of his butt. Not sure how revealing it is. Doesn't seem surprising that he wouldn't have such a projection on the tip of his tongue, unless expecting to announce it. And nobody should put much stock in such a projection, whether it was a considered number, or off-the-cuff.
by citizenpaul | 2025-09-06 17:06:25+00:00
>Who have no experience of the reality of working long hours themselves?

The majority of rich people do not work for their money. They inherit or "soft inherit" the money. They do investment stuff because it makes them feel big and powerful and important.

You can tell by their speech patterns. Meet some rich people in real life and pay attention to just how slow their patterns of speech and movement are on average. Most of them act like they don't have a care and all the time in the world. Because they do and they always have. Hustle is for the plebs.

Look back at some of the big scams like Wework, FTX, theranos. I've read the documentaries and its the same story. All the rich people they bilked say the same thing. "THEY PAID SO MUCH ATTENTION TO ME" more or less.
by lordhumphrey | 2025-09-06 17:06:54+00:00
The worker-drones powering the software world have so far resolutely not managed to reflect on their primary role in implementing the dystopian technological landscape we live in today, when it comes to privacy.

Or they have and they simply don't care, or they feel they can't change anything anyway, or the pay-check is enough to soothe any unease. The net result is the same.

Snowden's revelations happened 12 years ago, and there were plenty of what appeared to be well-intentioned articles and discussions in the years that followed. And yet, arguably, things are even worse today.
by bullen | 2025-09-06 17:07:15+00:00
I think VT's are only going to be interesting if you need 1000s of them doing tiny amount of small work often.

For me I have been waiting for them for 20 years, as the blocking IO made MMO development impossible.

In the meantime we got NIO in 1.4 that only became performant and stable around 1.7 so it's been a slow progress.

I dug out my old blocking server code from back then and with a fresh coat of paint I'm ready to let the non pinned VT's rip and compare them to the NIO backend!
by ACCount37 | 2025-09-06 17:07:56+00:00
Humans can't "inspect their own weights and examine the contents" either.

No human has ever managed to read out his connectome without external instrumentation. There were entire human civilizations that thought that the seat of consciousness was the heart - which, for creatures that claim to know how their own minds work, is a baffling error to make.

LLMs are quite similar in that to humans. They, too, have no idea what their hidden size is, or how many weights they have, or how exactly are the extra modalities integrated into them, or whether they're MoE or dense. They're incredibly ignorant of their own neural architecture. And if you press them on it, they'll guess, and they'll often be wrong.

The difference between humans and LLMs comes down to the training data. Humans learn continuously - they remember what they've seen and what they haven't, they try things, they remember the outcomes, and get something of a grasp (and no, it's not anything more than "something of a grasp") of how solid or shaky their capabilities are. LLMs split training and inference in two, and their trial-and-error doesn't extend beyond a context window. So LLMs don't get much of that "awareness of their own capabilities" by default.

So the obvious answer is to train that awareness in. Easier said than done. You need to, essentially, use a training system to evaluate an LLM's knowledge systematically, and then wire the awareness of the discovered limits back into the LLM.

OpenAI has a limited-scope version of this in use for GPT-5 right now.
by throw0101c | 2025-09-06 17:08:05+00:00
> I'm pretty sure China, Russia, N. Korea, Iran, and Venezuela noticed, and noticed hard.

LOL. I'm sure they also noticed that the VP and SECDEF did operational planning on commercial phones:

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_government_group...

It was named the DoD under Truman, who served in WW1 and was involved (at the tail end) of WW2 and the initial stages of the Cold War. After which the following Presidents had no problem with it Eisenhower (SCHAEF), JFK (WW2 veteran; Purple Heart), LBJ (WW2 veteran; Silver Star), Nixon (WW2 veteran), Ford and Carter and Bush 41 (veterans).

This is immature posturing.
by bee_rider | 2025-09-06 17:08:09+00:00
> I am not sure why but otherwise seemingly intelligent people seem to be incapable of internalizing that any cost, expense, or fine levied against any corporate entity will always, with 100% (not any other percentage) be rolled into prices. The minor headache of it lowering returns will also be offset and will not really make a difference to any meaningful degree.

This is a very strongly stated opinion that directly contradicts basic theories like “supply and demand.” Of course, simple Econ 101 models often need to be expanded by more complex ones, to capture actual behavior. I guess given the level of smugness in your comment (“otherwise seemingly intelligent,” ok, lol) you have some pretty solid evidence that you just… decided not to share?
by Jensson | 2025-09-06 17:08:26+00:00
> There is knowledge of correct and incorrect, that’s what loss is

Loss is only correctness in terms of correct language, not correct knowledge. It correlates with correct knowledge, but that is all, that correlation is why LLM is useful for tasks at all but we still don't have a direct measure for correct knowledge in the models.

So for language tasks loss is correctness, so for things like translations LLM are extremely reliable. But for most other kinds of tasks they are just loosely correlated.
by ohdeargodno | 2025-09-06 17:08:45+00:00
996 done on your own time without expectations of it being done can be understood if you're excited about it. It's dumb, it ruins your health and your social experiences, but whatever, you're usually young and dumb. A good employer would actively tell you to slow down and manage your energy if it goes on for too long..

996 mandated by the company is 1/ illegal 2/ straight up illegal 3/ a clear signal that they do not see you as a human being.

Worst case scenario, 996 is dumb. Not a super high bar to clear.
by noir_lord | 2025-09-06 17:08:50+00:00
Do they sell one that is functional without the cloud though.

I’m not buying any device that requires a paid subscription to a cloud to get full functionality since if that goes away so does the ability to use the device.

A policy that’s served me well having friends IRL who keep getting bitten by services/IoT changing/going away/end of life.

Sell me a functional product with a subscription and I’m interested, everything else, no way.
by grayhatter | 2025-09-06 17:09:01+00:00
That orthogonalality is my exact point. I believe you're correct; quality and correctness aren't negative pressures to survival. If anything, the should support survival, and I'd assume should also have a slight positive pressure on adoption/growth.

But I'd hope you'd admit quality and correctness aren't free attributes? They do have a cost. I can churn out low quality code way faster than I can produce code I'm proud of. If I attach myself to the quality of the code, and get stumped by some bug, become frustrated, and take a break from project_a, to work on something else, and while working on project_b to "clear my mind", I fall in love with project_b, or it gets more popular, or whatever that "pressure" happens to be... project_a has no remaining developers, and it is still dead now. Thus, quality has had a negative impact on it's survival.

Suitability has a tenuous connection and dependence on quality and correctness. (which I believe are synonyms for the same core idea?)

But why are so many businesses (the ones that still survive) so demoralizingly dysfunctional? Because they're run by individuals who don't value quality and correctness above [other attribute]. When given the choice to increase money (which is effectively the exact same thing as market share, and when talking about survival popularity is the same thing as suitability), or increase quality. They will always make the decision that ensures their survival, (by chance, no by intent, that's the orthogonality). Eventually, they'll turn that knob too far, degrade their quality enough and create an ecological niche for someone else to take over. (A competitor that maybe they acquire before it causes a real risk to it's survival/popularity, again choosing to make money/survive, over a decision targeting quality)

Would *you* rather make money, or write something high quality? I use and love marginalia, so I think I can guess the answer. (Thank you so much for building something that actually meaningfully improves the internet btw!) Are there decisions you could make that would trade the quality to become more popular, or make more money? Yes, I'm sure, but you don't seem to be trying to become the next google.
by georgeburdell | 2025-09-06 17:09:34+00:00
I have not pulled an all nighter proper (the worst was going to sleep at 6 and waking up at 7:30), but working late into the night is usually distraction free. During work hours, I feel obligated to quickly respond to coworker's emails and help requests, so most of my own work is worthless during that time unless it’s the equivalent of updating a config file
by akkad33 | 2025-09-06 17:10:16+00:00
> The language itself is quite beautiful when used properly and with modern features.

I respect your opinion but I wouldn't call Java beautiful (of course it depends on your definition of beautiful). It takes so much ceremony to do things you would do without any thought in other languages .

Initiating a mutable set

Python

`a = {1,2}`

What most Java programmers do

``` var a = new HashSet<>(); a.add(1); a.add(2); ```

Shorter one but requires more ceremony, and hence knowledge of more language semantics

``` var a = new HashSet<>(new Arraylist<>(List.of(1,2)) ```

I don't know if the above works but the Idea is to initiate a list and pass it into a HashSet constructor.

Similarly Java 21 allows you to model union types but doing so requires you to define N+1 classes where N is the number of union cases whereas in other languages it's as simple as `type A = C |D`
by webspinner | 2025-09-06 17:10:51+00:00
What about .txt? I use a screen reader, and sometimes, I like to put things in plain text. Or even, a plain text PDF would work! Also, clean HTML! A lot of times, I just like the links in a listy format, so I can look at them that way! Sure, I can clean up a CSV, but that gave me nightmares in 2010 lol!! Definitely a cool thing though!
by heresie-dabord | 2025-09-06 17:11:02+00:00
> what I don’t get is why we’re making this propaganda instead of that propaganda.

The allegiances of the oligarchs have changed.

Imagine a modern remake of Casablanca. Amoral Rick is a friend of the Nazis. He gladly hands Laszlo to Strasser. Ilsa despises Rick and Louis has him shot.
by thinkharderdev | 2025-09-06 17:11:06+00:00
> Philosophically, checking that a field is required or not is data validation and doesn't have anything to do with serialization

But protocol buffers is not just a serialization format it is an interface definition language. And not being able to communicate that a field is required or not is very limiting. Sometimes things are required to process a message. If you need to add a new field but be able to process older versions of the message where the field wasn't required (or didn't exist) then you can just add it as optional.

I understand that in some situations you have very hard compatibility requirements and it makes sense to make everything optional and deal with it in application code, but adding a required attribute to fields doesn't stop you from doing that. You can still just make everything optional. You can even add a CI lint that prevents people from merging code with required fields. But making required fields illegal at the interface definition level just strikes me as killing a fly with a bazooka.
by apparent | 2025-09-06 17:11:22+00:00
Part of the issue is that this enables companies to give smaller discounts to people they identify as more likely to want a product. The net effect of understanding much more about every person on earth is that people will increasingly find the price of goods to be just about the max they would be willing to pay. This shifts more profit to companies, and ultimately to the AI companies that enable this type of personalization.
by ants_everywhere | 2025-09-06 17:11:25+00:00
> People will respond to incentives....People aren't morally reprehensible because they prefer convenience over hardship

To clarify my point isn't that anyone is morally reprehensible. My point is that using a free VC-backed service is like selling an implied option. You don't know when they're going to invoke the option, but eventually they will. And often it will be when you've gotten used to the income from selling the option.

It's not a question of morality or judgment, it's just meant to be a description of what the game we're playing is.

> If you don't like it, make easy things that work the way you like them, run them ethically, and don't sell them to anyone.

I'm trying to
by jvanderbot | 2025-09-06 17:11:37+00:00
It is different because you collect a salary the whole time and build your resume. Its not like you file an LLC and then receive a check in the mail for two years of whatever you want.

For a CEO founder, 996 is necessary to even have a shot at building and fundraising, and even then you're likely to quickly fail. Instead an IC banks on joining a founder who has funding and can get more while you build and collect a reasonable salary, and save for rainy day.
by ForOldHack | 2025-09-06 17:11:40+00:00
12 hours max then the crash of undecipjerable gibberish. See? Your brain requires rest. My 12 hours days had two naps. While the rest of the team did not, in only a month, everyone but me literally crashed and burned...the first clue was them not finishing sentences. Next was searching for words, and then the pause while they stare off into space. All the Facebook prison experiment.
by WhyNotHugo | 2025-09-06 17:12:34+00:00
The author’s experience summarises well the sad state of GUI apps, especially in the open source world.

That’s why we end up using command line tools and text-based interfaces. Or I end up writing code to do things.

It’s not that I dislike the idea of GUI apps, it’s that in practice, they make me have a really bad time, and usually don’t even get the job done.
by mrbonner | 2025-09-06 17:12:49+00:00
I read somewhere (not remember though) that in the 2000s, the working culture in Japan was crazy. It was even crazier than the 996. In reality, most just did things inefficiently, i.e, writing a short email would take 20 minutes. So, with all those inefficiencies added up, pouring 14 hours away day didn't seem to contribute much productivity anyway.
by maxlin | 2025-09-06 17:14:07+00:00
Needs to be known that Fred Lambert pushes out so much negative Tesla press that its reasonable to say that he's on a crusade. And not a too fact-based one.

Like with this. No, Tesla hasn't communicated any as such. Everyone knows FSD is late. But Robotaxi shows it is very meaningfully progressing towards true autonomy. And for example crushed the competition (not literally) in a recent very high-effort test in avoiding crashes on a highway with obstacles that were hard to read for almost all the other systems: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0xumyEf-WRI
by summerlight | 2025-09-06 17:14:07+00:00
> since required fields don't contribute to b/w incompatibility at all, as every real-world protocol has a mandatory required version number that's tied to a direct parsing strategy with strictly defined algebra

At least I know 10 different tech companies with billion dollars revenue which does not suit to your description. This comment makes me wonder if you have any experience of working on real world distributed systems. Oh and I'm pretty sure you did not read Kenton's comment; he already precisely addressed your point:

> This is especially true when it comes to protocols, because in a distributed system, you cannot update both sides of a protocol simultaneously. I have found that type theorists tend to promote "version negotiation" schemes where the two sides agree on one rigid protocol to follow, but this is extremely painful in practice: you end up needing to maintain parallel code paths, leading to ugly and hard-to-test code. Inevitably, developers are pushed towards hacks in order to avoid protocol changes, which makes things worse.

I recommend you to do your homework before making such a strong argument. Reading a 5 mins long comment is not that hard. You can avoid lots of shame by doing so.
by llbbdd | 2025-09-06 17:14:08+00:00
"Devs use React because they how to use the web platform, here's how to do it right" and then posts a vanilla solution that doesn't solve understand or solve the problem. Tale as old as time. Bonus points if covering the edge cases in the vanilla solution and making it work for a second component would involve a tiny homegrown reimplentation of most of React anyway.
by giardini | 2025-09-06 17:15:10+00:00
My mom gave me one 325 mg aspirin dissolved in a spoon of water and a little sugar as a tot - it was tasty!

I took the typical two 325 mg aspirin for headache thru college and grad school.

Years later I had a cracked rib and was prescribed 800 mg ibufprofen twice daily. The rib pain vanished for the duration (and my swim times improved significantly)! I became a convert to Advil.

Years later I'm older and minimize my painkillers - most of the time I take nothing but coffee. But if sudden brain pain strikes I take either baby aspirin, ibuprofen, or "Headache Relief", a witches' brew sold by many vendors (typically ~250 mg acetaminophen, 250 mg aspirin and caffeine). So I'm hedging my bets!

If I must use something every day then I use baby aspirin (if worried about heart/circulatory issues) or ibuprofen (if worried about pain). When I need to think clearly (most the time) I avoid acetaminophen.

IMHO people overestimate the "gut bleeding" risk from NSAIDS.
by thinkharderdev | 2025-09-06 17:15:16+00:00
Sure, you just have to balance that against the cost of a poorly specified API interface. The errors because clients aren't clear on what is really required or not, what they should consider an error if it is not defined, etc. And of course all the boilerplate code that you have to write to convert the interface model to an internal domain model you can actually use inside your code.
by seltzered_ | 2025-09-06 17:15:17+00:00
The youtube channel 'State of Charge' has a number of videos talking about cheap connectors and/or lower spec connectors catching fire. Happens even on setups where people had a dedicated level 2 ev charger outlet (NEMA 14-50 , aka dryer outlet) but the installer used a connector not rated for enough current. See https://youtu.be/fzgxKChqjtc to start.

One needs to do one or possibly a combination of:

- Set the pin setting on a home charger for a lower current output. Theres also portable chargers with programmable current limiting, which I find more flexible.

- Replace with a better outlet/wiring setup. Many advocate for a hardwired setup over using an outlet.
by deepakvish128 | 2025-09-06 17:15:38+00:00
Hi everyone!

Tired of managing complex data pipelines

Struggling to act real-time on customer data

That’s exactly why we built . Instead of waiting weeks or months just to build a simple rule, act instantly with rule based actions on Datablit within minutes, no need to write code. It’s the all-in-one platform for customer data: Capture Analyse Act Experiment Collaborate

All in real-time, no code, and zero data chaos.

1- Ingest data and take rule based actions in real time 2- In-depth analysis for long term-business decision 3- Run experiment before rolling out new features 4- Collaborate with your teammates for maximum productivity

Visit www.datablit.com and create a free account

Watch our installation demo - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Y_JCqGFMqY
by mdaniel | 2025-09-06 17:16:23+00:00
I didn't recognize the GSL citation, so for others:

- https://github.com/zeromq/gsl/blob/v4.1.5/examples/fsm_c.gsl

whew, this readme has everything

- XML in, text out: https://github.com/zeromq/gsl#:~:text=feed%20it%20some%20dat...

- a whole section on software engineering https://github.com/zeromq/gsl#model-oriented-programming

- they support COBOL https://github.com/zeromq/gsl#cobol

- and then a project 11 years old with "we're going to document these functions one day" https://github.com/zeromq/gsl#global-functions

What a journey that was
by santiagobasulto | 2025-09-06 17:16:56+00:00
You're all answering from a very privileged standpoint. I started my career in tech from a small town in Argentina. When broadband was prevalent around the world (2012) I was still working with a dial up connection on a $200 computer.

I grew up seeing what poverty and lack of opportunities does to people, and I was determined to break away from that.

I got a job at a startup by sheer luck, and it completely changed my life. Heck, I was not even doing 996, I was getting up at 7AM and going to bed at midnight EVERY DAY including Sundays.

When I was not squashing tickets at a 2X rate than my European coworkers, I was learning new things, trying out new projects, writing blog posts for the company, doing customer support. I didn't care.

So yes, I agree now (from a privileged position) that 996 might be unhealthy in the long run. But let's not gate-keep or be naive enough to understand that some kids will need to put that effort if they want to make a difference. And yes, ideally the world would be fair and everybody should need only 40hs/week to make a living, butt that's a fairy tale.

If you're a young ambitious above-average person, and you're going to listen to people claiming this is "bad", please also compare your to their privileges: race, geographic position, net worth of your family, etc...