MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by MangoToupe | 2025-09-14 17:28:52+00:00
This is not a serious conversation. One party pays lip service while simultaneously trying to appease people who want lower gas prices by approving more drilling and pumping, seemingly assuming we can somehow entrepreneurship our way out of the pit we're digging ourselves. The other side actively wants to drive us off a cliff. No candidate for president in either party has ever offered even a serious evaluation about the threat global warming poses our way of life.
by zahlman | 2025-09-14 17:29:02+00:00
> responding to false glorifications of him

That is not a fair characterization of what they are doing, no. (Besides which, "glorification" is subjective. People thinking Kirk was a virtuous person because of things they consider virtuous but you don't, is not "false".)

> These comments obviously aren't directed at the family but the news publications and media's handling of his passing.

None of the example comments I have been shown reference supposed news or media bias. Many of them have straight up described the murder as a good or morally just action. Some have even expressed a desire for the same to happen to others in Kirk's orbit.
by softwaredoug | 2025-09-14 17:29:22+00:00
“The Left” as educated elites clustered in cities has and will always be fairly impotent (at least electorally, maybe not culturally)

“The Left” as defined by a broad, working class based coalition independent of urban/rural has historically been formidable. But as the closest example of this in recent history - Obama coalition - erodes, and GOP eats into working class voters, it becomes less formidable.

Really The Left (the Democratic Party) needs to rebuild an electorally successful coalition. The leaders that could lead that aren’t obvious to me yet.
Show HN: I made an app that solves movie discovery
by AljazHisoft | 2025-09-14 17:29:56+00:00
I built this because every movie night with friends turned into 30 minutes of endless scrolling on Netflix or Prime. By the time we picked something, the mood was gone.

MovieLoop shows you short clips instead of posters, so you get the real feel of a movie right away. If you like it, you add it to your watchlist. If not, just swipe to the next.

Would love to hear your feedback.
by cryptonector | 2025-09-14 17:30:27+00:00
This is what the EPA says in their filing:

> Now, after further reviewing the statute pursuant to a publicly announced reconsideration process, EPA agrees with petitioners that parts of the rulemaking process were unlawful and parts of the Rule are thus invalid.

This does NOT preclude lawfully making the same ruling later. It also does mean that Zeldin thinks we shouldn't reduce PFAS in our water.

It does mean that:

- had the EPA held to its previous position the court could have found the rulemaking process illegal and forced the EPA to start over

- the EPA retains the ability to restart this rulemaking and this time comply with the applicable acts of Congress.

TFA says:

> Separately, EPA previously announced that it will seek to extend the compliance deadline for PFOA and PFOS standards by two years from 2029 to 2031.

Well, yes hello!! Take these two bits of news in combination and what do we have? We have this:

- the EPA concedes that the previous rulemaking was illegal

- the EPA indicates that it wants to restart the process and get to roughly the same rules with compliance deadlines in 2031, and this delay is presumptively due of the delay in rulemaking due to the previous rulemaking process having been illegal.

And TFA and the commenters here are all screaming their heads off that Zeldin (and Trump) are trying to kill us all or something.

Maybe look at the details first? TFA certainly doesn't mention the details! After a fairly obscure first two paragraphs it launches into a diatribe.

Fortunately TFA did link the EPA filing, and the very first paragraph of that filing tells us the first half of the story: that the Biden EPA did not follow lawful process. Surely one could debate the lawfulness of the process followed by the Biden EPA, but if the court was on its way to ruling as much then the EPA getting ahead of it was a good thing. The second part of the story is less* clear from just TFA and this filing, but TFA gives us a clue that the EPA apparently intends to restart the rulemaking process, which presumably will lead to roughly the same rules.
by pxc | 2025-09-14 17:30:28+00:00
I'm not sure why you would. I don't think POSIX generally specifies the behavior of command line tools in such a level of detail. FWIW, the regex type used by default by GNU Grep is already POSIX's Basic Regular Expressions. (It also supports POSIX Extended Regular Expressions and PCRE2.)

Afaik, EulerOS and other Unix-certified Linux distros just ship the usual GNU userland.
by shagie | 2025-09-14 17:30:59+00:00
Normalize factual focused news that covers the topics that right (and center) news doesn't cover. This doesn't need to be biased and shouldn't be denigrating - I would like to believe that the liberal bias of reality is sufficient. Personally, I don't want to listen to angry people of any political bend. Name calling sounds childish.

As to conspiracy theories on the left, they're there. Some of the anti-vax conspiracies came from people who would be considered on the (I'm going to apologize of this is seen as denigrating considering my earlier statement) granola side of the left. There's a fair bit of populist anti-corporate conspiracies and attribution of active malice rather a dispassionate corporate approach to trying to maximize profits.

I would suggest instead considering that it isn't "left vs right" conspiracies (though they have their own spectrum) but rather that there exists a "prone to conspiracies demographic" that is swayed by the left or the right at a given time and those conspiracies that are most in line with the political ideology of the swaying are more likely to be normalized. Politicians agreeing with the conspiracies speeds up its normalization and helps sway the conspiracy minded demographic.

I believe that the pro-science, pro-space, climate change is real, vaccines work of... lets put a range of 2008 to say... 2020 (its not that Biden abandoned it but rather that that congress was not advancing policies and the focus was more on "don't have it break more") significantly alienated the prone to conspiracy demographic from the Democratic Party. The Republican Party has embraced this demographic with the claims of a stolen election, supporting anti-vaccination positions, and openly accepting support of the various anti-{race} groups.

It wouldn't take too much for anti-capitalism or anti-government conspiracies to be normalized and spoken openly by "the left" if that is one's target demographic. It's that left leaning and conspiracy leaning is a slim demographic to try to target. If the conspiracy demographic was decoupled from the current Republican Party, then I would expect to see more left leaning conspiracy theories be espoused openly.
by photomatt | 2025-09-14 17:31:14+00:00
As the lead of the software I do have an opinion about which functionality is core to the user experience and which isn't. The WP.com paid plans offered a ton, including unlimited traffic, 24/7 support, stats, multi-datacenter replication, and dozens of more features above what most paid WP hosting plans offer, but we reserved custom code at the higher-priced plans. Due to getting more efficient over the years, we can now offer it on all paid plans, but that wasn't economically feasible before. There are dozens of other WordPress Multi-site hosts like Edublogs that offer the same trade-off we used to, it's built into the core code. I'm sorry that wasn't a good fit for your needs, but it has worked well for millions of people over two decades.

Maybe you think Coca-cola should taste a certain way, and want to sell that to consumers, but without commercial rights to the trademark you can't do that under the Coca-cola brand, you have to call it something else.
by peterspath | 2025-09-14 17:31:51+00:00
But at what cost?

Energy is very expensive which makes everything expensive like normal cost like groceries, heating, everyday transportation. Housing market is the worst, too little houses are being build because of all the rules. Too many people are being let in which is leading to an overheated market for buying and renting houses.

For normal people this is a bad situation. It’s only good for property owners (that sell houses) and the government because more tax income.

I’m lucky that I am a software engineer and have an above average salary. But the average person in my country (the Netherlands) is worse off. I hear many stories of people that can’t go on holiday anymore abroad while 5 years ago they could.

This all in the name of being green and being the best boy in class. Set an example. Need to start somewhere. We (our country hence the tax payers) spent billions on it. And get very very little in return.
by nuancebydefault | 2025-09-14 17:31:57+00:00
Indeed, the default should be to assume the best intentions of people. Also, people can have a bad day and be snarky. Next meeting they might as well be friendly.

Staying positive and not letting (potential) negative feedback derail you, works like magic in the long run.

If someone is really picking on you, or they genuinely disapprove of your work, you will find out in due time.
by ForOldHack | 2025-09-14 17:32:08+00:00
I seriously do NOT want the two plus hours back I spent diddling ( 1 bit not ) all those bits. I first learned it in binary on an HP, and then had to learn it on an IBM mainframe, and then got an 8087, and it was so incredibly fast, but error crept in for Fourier transforms. Started using extended double to keep the errors at bay. Hilbert spaces here we came.

The killer app was not Lotus 1-2-3 v2, but Turbo Pascal w/ 8087 support. It screamed through tensors and 3D spaces, places we only saw on plotters.

It was not until I got a G3 and used Graphing calculator that I could explore sombrero functions of increasing frequency.

Floating point math is essential, not an option.
by estimator7292 | 2025-09-14 17:32:29+00:00
The problem with viewing AI through the lens of capitalism is the fact that you can't make it artificially scarce.

AI is largely capable of running on-device. In a few years, it's likely that most tasks that most people want AI for will be possible from a tiny model living in their phone. Open source models are plentiful, functional, and only becoming moreso.

But you can't monetize that. We're currently dumping billions of dollars into datacenter moats that are just gonna evaporate inside the decade.

For the average user doing their daily "who was that actor in that movie" query, no, you absolutely cannot monetize AI because all of your local devices can run the model for free with enough quality that no one will know or care that there's a difference.

For enterprise scale building a trillion dollar datacenter and 15 nuclear reactors to replace a hundred developers... also no. LLMs are not capable of that, and likely won't be in the foreseeable future. It's also extremely unclear that one could ever get an ROI on in-house AI like this. It might be more plausible if it were a commodity technology you can just buy, but then you can't make a moat.

The only hypothetical fortune to be found is by whoever is selling AI to people who think they need to buy AI. Just like bitcoin or NFTs.

The good news is that this has two possible outcomes: capitalist AI vendors will want to remove AI from individual access so they can sell it to you: everyone gets less AI. Capitalists realize they can never monetize AI when it's free and open source, and give up: everyone gets less AI. Win-win-win, in my book.
by Fluorescence | 2025-09-14 17:32:33+00:00
Sure but it's far from the exercise of an accepted power the OP refers to.

In a constitutional crisis, titles of the elected and inherited ultimately become a matter of opinion... but opinion is the path to victory up to the point it descends to military force. Any form of legitimacy becomes currency.

Back in the day we had constitutional crises that deposed the "rightful" monarch despite somewhat believing in the divine right of kings, the magic oils of coronation and weird blood theories around patrilinial descent. These days they have none of that magic and they are just some weirdos that appear in the papers now and again but still, in a moment of crisis, that whiff of history is a poker chip.
by pron | 2025-09-14 17:33:01+00:00
Your company has bought support from Oracle - either for the JDK or for some other product bundle - and that's part of the terms of whatever commercial service your company bought. There are no audits and no cost for people who just download and use the JDK. Oracle doesn't collect names or contacts, you don't need to provide any when you download the JDK, and the licence expressly permits commercial use (even if you choose the non-open-source licence; the download page for the non-opensource distribution says [1]: "JDK N binaries are free to use in production and free to redistribute, at no cost"). There used to be lots of use restrictions back in the Sun days, but Oracle removed them.

[1]: https://www.oracle.com/java/technologies/downloads/
by add-sub-mul-div | 2025-09-14 17:33:12+00:00
You're giving something away by suggesting that a balanced framing is: (1) destruction of our world, health, and lower/middle classes vs. (2) brown people bypassing an insane bureaucracy that prevents us from effectively receiving the tired, poor, huddled masses that we explicitly invite on the country's figurative doormat. You can be against the latter, sure, but suggesting these sides are anything close to equal is a choice.

Do you think we're stupid here?
by throw-qqqqq | 2025-09-14 17:33:32+00:00
> US typically gets the cheaper and worse option (less safe)

Yes. EU has the precautionary principle: you may market the product after documenting its safety. In the US, it’s often the other way around: you can market the product unless/until someone can show it to be unsafe.

This is often a point of conflict e.g. when negotiating free trade agreements between US and EU, as the US often sees this as a technical barrier to trade and protectionism.
by jjani | 2025-09-14 17:34:12+00:00
> If the democrats fail to do this, it’s not mere incompetence. It’s probably because their financial backers actually support the changes being made by Trump.

This has been clear for very long. Hence why they're still not doing it, and have for the last 9 years been and still[1] continue to push for Clinton-like candidates rather than whatever candidate has the biggest chance of winning elections. It isn't incompetence, and it hasn't been for ages. They're nearly just as captured. It's true that they're slightly less captured than R overall, but not to an extent that is actually meaningful.

Stating it as an "if" is copium. They have failed to, are failing to, and will continue to fail to do this, and it's intentional. What you're saying is so blindingly obvious that there is no other explanation - no Hanlon's razor for this one, the incompetence angle is not realistic.

[1] https://edition.cnn.com/2025/07/17/politics/2028-presidentia...
by parineum | 2025-09-14 17:34:25+00:00
That's not really a retort, unless the question in the comments is different than my comment.

11,000 years of data doesn't give you any meaningful data unless you can show that this _never_ happened in the past. 40 years is the amount of data for that.

There's no good evidence to suggest that 1/40 of it not happening is an abberation. It could be 1/100 of those 11,000 years this happened and there'd be no way to know.

If it continues to happen, we'll have something. For now nobody should be "alarmed".
by pqtyw | 2025-09-14 17:34:32+00:00
Don't get me wrong, I'm certainly not equating the values themselves, as you said they are the polar opposite. And to be honest I'm certainly not a fan of moral relativism in the direct sense.

The methods seem more concerning. First you have to give someone the right to define what these virtues mean in practice. Then you need to somehow impose them on the wider population. This is a rather dangerous tool and I think actual examples of such a top down approach working in democratic societies are quite rare.

It works if the consensus already exists in the society. Clearly these days that's not the case in quite a few places.

What do you then? Force children of people who have a radically different understanding of what these civil virtues are to attend schools which teach them against their will? Take them away if the parents refuse? Well that's what totalitarian states do...
by comprev | 2025-09-14 17:35:17+00:00
This might sound a little controversial, but have you considered other roles in IT, not just pure development jobs?

I've been in Ops for 20+ years now and started on 1st line support for an ISP, although I had very few options without a degree (or much of an academic background really).

An entry level role might be a stepping stone to other positions within the company - and an opportunity to network with colleagues in other departments.

Over the years I built professional relationships and moved up to 2nd line and then 3rd line (sysadmin). This provided industry experience, certifications and sufficient domain knowledge to move elsewhere.

A few peers from 1st line moved over to development after they helped provide direct feedback to the devs as users of their software.
by ranger_danger | 2025-09-14 17:36:01+00:00
How did Qubes OS prove them wrong? You still have root on qubes, humans still make errors, IMO it's therefore technically still less secure. Of course this assumes your goal is to prevent bad things from happening in general, regardless of how it happens, and not just say "yea the OS is secure but humans can still mess things up by using it wrong".

I think protecting people from themselves is a noble goal that is often overlooked, even if many will disagree with me.
by ndsipa_pomu | 2025-09-14 17:36:03+00:00
Just aiming for length rather than quality of life may not be the best idea, but usually people aiming for a long life are also aiming to be healthy as long as possible.

At least if you're alive, you've probably got the option to end it if you make that decision, but once you're dead that's it (not allowing for reincarnation).
by CLPadvocate | 2025-09-14 17:36:26+00:00
You wish. Basically 90% of German nazis stayed in Germany and were completely unharmed by any form of persecution. Most of them had even kept everything they stole from all the murdered people, including companies, homes, and items of value. A large share of the later West German Lawyers and Politicians had NS background, in the DDR it was slightly less. Of the rest - many were flown to the US to contribute to the American weapon programs, roughly similar share were taken to the UdSSR for the same reasons. "Burnt, buried, or escaped to South America" is the smallest part of them.
by somenameforme | 2025-09-14 17:36:28+00:00
This is tangential but relevant - Thailand's current fertility rate has fallen to 1, substantially less than Japan even. And this fertility collapse happened long enough that they've already entered into the population decline phase - with accelerating declines over the past 4 years.

It's still the early stages, but Thailand is going to unavoidably be entering into demographic collapse over the coming decades. So tourism, especially when it results in attracting lawful/educated/etc long-term residents, provides more than however much money people can spend.

Of course Thais themselves just need to start having a lot more babies, but it's not looking like that's going to happen. The whole world is going to look so different in 50 years, even if literally nothing whatsoever changed from a technological POV. Fertility issues are going to radically reshape the entire world and the balance of powers, perspectives, even religions, and much more.
by randycupertino | 2025-09-14 17:36:32+00:00
That's pretty interesting. Were there different flavors in each country as well? My friend brought me some paprika pringles from iceland and they were delicious. So good that we ordered them online but the online versions shipped terribly and were delivered as pringles dust. I used it to bread chicken which still was pretty good. But if you are in iceland get the paprika pringles!
by hedora | 2025-09-14 17:36:45+00:00
It depends on the state (in some you can register as a democrat and ask for a republican primary ballot), but I did this so I could vote against George W three times. (If only we could have him again instead of Trump…). You can register for whatever party you want, but some states have early deadlines.

One problem with creating real change with this approach is that the party elites get to decide who are on their ballots.

A while back, Colbert (?) tried to run as a republican and documented all the roadblocks he hit.

To get an idea of how it went, imagine a popular candidate going to a southern plantation to kiss the rings of the great-grandchildren of slave owners.

After deciding there is no personal upside to them, they decide to keep the candidate off the ballot and ask a servant to freshen their mint julep.
by zahlman | 2025-09-14 17:36:53+00:00
> It's a dog whistle.

What is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

My evidence is that my interpretation is consistent with many other things I have learned about viewpoints like Kirk's, from observing him and others over a period of many years. It is not a matter of "plausible deniability"; my interpretation is plainly and straightforwardly the one that makes the most sense to me, by far.

As noted upthread, the example also clearly maps to a specific object example.

Your reading, meanwhile, requires transforming a rhetorical question about whether someone should be "treated better" than someone whom Kirk clearly sees as highly virtuous, into a claim that every single aspect described of that person is a basis for denigration. That is supremely uncharitable and frankly implausible.
by yjftsjthsd-h | 2025-09-14 17:37:13+00:00
Yeah, I definitely think it's an excellent goal to erode the cases that need root. It is a powerful escape hatch, and I think it's important that it exist, but it's also a good thing to not need it. The difference is that I don't believe the system will ever cover everything I want to do, so I consider that escape hatch to be really important.
by shraddha92 | 2025-09-14 17:37:30+00:00
tbh, from what I've seen, it kinda is. Alot of people have gotten into the habit of giving default answers based on their routine even though it might not have happened on that day, or for example they did something different - they will not remember unless prompted

everything gets noted down or scheduled (which is a good thing especially if you're super super busy i guess but on the flipside- it encourages utilizing or relying on your memory less as there's no need to)

Which is why you also hear people say "oh it wasnt in my calendar so i didnt do it" "if i don't put it in my calendar I'll forget"
by Babkock | 2025-09-14 17:37:33+00:00
I'm sorry to say this but I just enjoy the irony of it all. His last words were "Counting or not counting gang violence?". He literally died arguing for less gun control, saying mass violence and death is acceptable. I guess he found out the hard way the consequences of spreading hateful, bigoted, divisive, evil shit. Ben Shapiro cancelled a bunch of his visits to college campuses, I think that's hilarious - I wouldn't shed any tears for him, either.

What if Trump is behind this, and he had him killed to distract from the Epstein files business? He could also blame it on the liberals and the left, and make his own party look like victims.