MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by zx10rse | 2025-09-25 17:57:12+00:00
You are most definitely not right. The EU charter of fundamental rights is an agreement that holds legal binding. The institutions who are supposed to uphold the charter are CJEU, European Commission, FRA, NHRIs.

The people who wrote this proposal said it themselves - "Whilst different in nature and generally speaking less intrusive, the newly created power to issue removal orders in respect of known child sexual abuse material certainly also affects fundamental rights, most notably those of the users concerned relating to freedom of expression and information."

This proposal is illegal. The fact that CJEU at least haven't issued a statement that this is illegal tells you everything you need to know about the EU and its democracy.
by klik99 | 2025-09-25 17:57:15+00:00
I've instinctively been avoiding hospitals run by PE, and now I have a good reason to.

I'll never forget with my first kid they tried to scare us into genetic testing - I mean, they had a pamphlet and video they were required to show us that were meant to scare us into it, but I could tell from the doctors face that she wasn't into it and felt like she was apologizing when she said she had to play this video and leave the room. We switched to a different hospital almost immediately.
by NoahZuniga | 2025-09-25 17:57:22+00:00
> Imagine a user emails your support address. A Worker can receive the email, parse its content, call a third-party API to create a ticket, and then use the Email Sending binding to send an immediate confirmation back to the user with their ticket number. That’s the power of a unified Email Service.

This is/was already possible. You can just reply to an email from an email worker.
by lkey | 2025-09-25 17:57:47+00:00
Intentionally and artificially reducing the quality or quantity of life-saving resources to the point of excess death is, in fact, violence. I think you wouldn't have trouble recognizing the starvation campaign is Gaza as intentional violence.

Thus, I have no trouble asserting that PE firms commit intentional violence against patients.

Indirection allows you diffuse the responsibility into the anodyne 'immoral decisionmaking' while social murder remains as it ever was.
by vel0city | 2025-09-25 17:57:53+00:00
I'm not entirely aware of all their products, but just thinking about a CDN, isn't that in many ways kind of fungible? Is it really that hard to migrate to your big cloud co's CDN (CloudFront, Google Cloud CDN) or the several other large competitors without an immense amount of work?

Please, educate me and tell me what's up.
by somenameforme | 2025-09-25 17:57:57+00:00
I said for the overwhelming majority of things people go to the hospital for. And the overwhelming majority would be things far more commoditized than cancer - stomach aches, injuries, fevers, infections, cardiovascular issues, etc. I chose breast cancer because it is the most common type of cancer and at the extreme fringes of my what comment might cover. It just so happens that my comment does cover it as well.

Incidentally, it's also the same story for colorectal cancer, the 2nd most common type of cancer. Here's another study on the topic. [1] They have a survival rate of 88.6 vs 85.9 for breast cancer, but it's a large observational study that's not normalized, so the confounders/biases there probably explain the reduction in survival rate at non-NIC hospitals. Colorectal cancer is even smaller - 0.2%.

NIC hospitals only showed a significant effect on cancers with low survival rates, and especially on rarer cancers. For instance with pancreatic cancer 93.8% of people who went to a non-NIC hospital were dead in 5 years, by contrast 'only' 87.5% of NIC hospital patients were. Feel free to look up the data yourself. I'm not searching for cherry picked studies, there are none - as there seem to be oddly few studies on this question, and they all say the same thing. What benefit there is is quite small, and heavily driven by extremely rare things.

[1] - https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4892698/
by kgwgk | 2025-09-25 17:58:11+00:00
> The company says one difference is that users are not going up against the house but instead trading contracts with other users on the opposite side of the proposition.

> "We are simply an exchange. So we sit between people that are buying contracts on a yes and a no side. We don't win by people losing. And we don't lose by people winning. We simply sit in between that transaction."

I don’t know what else would you like to be told. That’s an exchange, with one user taking one side and another taking the other side. No brokers are involved when end-users connect directly to the exchange.

Wikipedia mentions that they would like other platforms to give access to the exhange, and the existence of market makers (one affiliate company, one independent company) that may provide liquidity. But the basic exchange is user-to-user.
by overfeed | 2025-09-25 17:58:12+00:00
> To the extent it is, people are universally guilty of it, unless you can find a clear bright line for which selfish(/rational)

We all ingest some level of arsenic, and are "universally" exposed to radioactivity, but just because something is falls on a continuous spectrum, doesn't mean all levels are equal, there is a point where it becomes too much. That point will not be the same for everyone, but it exists.

> Is it some number of hops from the person who dies that makes the difference?

Not according to the Nuremberg trials.
by nextos | 2025-09-25 17:58:35+00:00
> how to prevent them from being pushed over and over until a specific context allows it to be approved.

We need more diverse mobile OSes that can be used as daily drivers. Right now, it's almost a mono-culture with the Apple-Google duopoly. Without this duopoly, centralization and totalitarian temptations would be less likely.

There's GrapheneOS, which is excellent and can be used without Google, but it relies on Google hardware and might be susceptible to viability issues if/when Google closes down AOSP. Nevertheless, they are working on their own device that will come with GrapheneOS pre-installed, which is exciting.

There's also SailfishOS, which has a regular GNU/Linux userland and almost usable at this stage with native applications. As a stopgap, it can also run Android applications with an emulation layer, and plenty of banking ones work just fine.
by KPGv2 | 2025-09-25 17:58:48+00:00
> it would be interesting to see if individuals are more willing to adopt a level of increased surveillance as it seems as the only reasonable protection against terror.

One presumes it would make terrorism easier if you could hack in and find out where your target is at any given time. What they're doing. What their plans are for this evening.

Also I think one could probably point to the current US president as proof for why this is an insane idea. Imagine if he really did have access to everything we say.
by thisislife2 | 2025-09-25 17:59:14+00:00
You are right that with the Trump administration (well, bipartisan support), US companies don't have to worry about any adverse political action by cooperating with Israel. Negative publicity from the common people also won't adversely affect their bottom line. But they do have to worry about the legal aspects - the US is one of the few countries actually having laws against genocide / war crimes. Trump may be ready to bomb the Hague and the ICC, but we know he can't bomb US courts for any similar proceedings against any US or foreign firms ...
by drnick1 | 2025-09-25 17:59:41+00:00
I don't have deliverability issues to the big providers, but that comes down to the age of my domain and my IP in a clean non-residential block. But you won't have reputation issues if your friends and family also run their own server and don't enforce such arbitrary requirements. Running your own servers, not only for email, is the only way to regain control over your computing.
by tomsmeding | 2025-09-25 17:59:51+00:00
I don't think ChatControl is a good idea. I also think that if you want to convince people of that, using the same misleading language tactics as the other side is not the way to go.

> These scanning systems get it wrong most of the time. [...] Irish law enforcement confirms this: only 20.3% of 4,192 automated reports actually contained illegal material.

Wrong most of the time that they report something. Technically correct, although a somewhat tricky formulation.

Literally next paragraph:

> Even with hypothetical 99% accuracy (which current systems don’t achieve), scanning billions of daily messages would generate millions of false accusations.

This is a different accuracy percentage: here the author means 99% of all messages, not only the reported ones, which the previous 20.3% referred to. Furthermore, these two paragraphs together sound very fishy: if current systems are not accurate enough to generate "millions of false accusations", presumably (?) they generate at least that. But with the 20.3% true positives fraction, that would mean hundreds of thousands true accusations per day.

Which part am I misunderstanding?
by paxys | 2025-09-25 18:00:01+00:00
Some of this may be correct but writing off administrative overhead as negligible is laughable.

Insurance companies spend a maximum of 80-85% of collected premiums on healthcare, and only because this is regulated by law, otherwise it would be even less.

On the other side hospitals, clinics and private practitioners all have dedicated departments and staff whose only job is to deal with billing and negotiations with insurance providers. That also costs a hell of a lot more than a couple percent.

So just adding up these two there's 15-30% of medical expenditure that isn't going towards actual care, just overhead. Recover this cost and the US will immediately fall in line with how much the rest of the developed world spends on healthcare, even with the high doctors salaries and drug costs.
by Xelbair | 2025-09-25 18:00:12+00:00
>European Commission: Commissioners are nominated by elected national governments and must be approved by the directly elected European Parliament.

With so many levels of indirection, that citizen votes are irrelevant and they don't need to care about it - only about support of major political group at the top. And surprisingly enough Parliment is relatively stable.

>Council of the EU: Ministers are accountable to their national parliaments, which are elected by citizens.

same as above.

i don't advocate for leaving the EU, but this needs to change. Those positions, which are the ones pushing for such legislation usually, need to be held accountable by citizens. At least EC.

No more rotations, or other such bullshit.

Right now EU is sitting in middle ground between federation and trade union, reaping(from citizens point of view) downsides of both systems.
by dpifke | 2025-09-25 18:00:17+00:00
I've run my own mail servers for many decades and have never had any deliverability issues. I've also never used bargain basement cloud VPS services with horrible reputations.

The best way to ensure a good reputation is to obtain your own address space from a RIR. Barring that, you need to choose a provider with a decent reputation to delegate the space to you.
by swalsh | 2025-09-25 18:00:21+00:00
" Blockchain is probably the most useless technology ever invented "

Actually AI may be more like blockchain then you give it credit for. Blockchain feels useless to you because you either don't care about or value the use cases it's good for. For those that do, it opens a whole new world they eagerly look forward to. As a coder, it's magical to describe a world, and then to see AI build it. As a copyeditor it may be scary to see AI take my job. Maybe you've seen it hilucinate a few times, and you just don't trust it.

I like the idea of interoperable money legos. If you hate that, and you live in a place where the banking system is protected and reliable, you may not understand blockchain. It may feel useless or scary. I think AI is the same. To some it's very useful, to others it's scary at best and useless at worst.
by toast0 | 2025-09-25 18:00:51+00:00
Here's an example from my recent life:

Buying a 6-pack of pinballs. Amazon is $17, shipping included with prime [1], Marco is $10 + $13 shipping [2]. Amazon wins, but if you also need some 555 bulbs, Amazon is $5 for ten [3], and Marco is $2.25, shipping stays at $13.

One pack of pinballs and one pack of bulbs is $22 or $25.25, but one pack of pinballs and three packs of bulbs is $32 at amazon vs $30 at Marco.

Time to arrive varies, but Amazon is quoting me a week for the pinballs at the moment, and Marco got me my last order in a week. Also, I have no doubts about Marco's supply chain.

I see similar things when ordering parts for my midlife crisis car. There's a couple things where it is better to get parts on Amazon, but most things it makes more sense to go to a niche specific site or a car parts vendor.

[1] https://www.amazon.com/Ball-Baron-Polaris-Non-Magnetic-Pinba... [2] https://www.marcospecialties.com/pinball-parts/PB116-6 [3] https://www.amazon.com/CEC-Industries-Bulbs-W2-1x9-5d-T-3-25... [4] https://www.marcospecialties.com/pinball-parts/165-5002-00
by dijit | 2025-09-25 18:01:06+00:00
I think people don't tend to realise how authoritarian the internal structures of companies are.

They're effectively miniature dictatorships. Normalising removing services because a tenant does something you personally find disagreeable is fine in the moment, but what happens when it's someone you support? Like when they removed Office365 access for a member of the EU parliament.[0]

For me, this is more proof (not less) that I shouldn't rely on US tech giants. Not because I will be collecting data on a population to do god-knows-what with, but because someone believes themselves to be the moral authority on what the compute I rent should be doing and that moral authority can be outraged for the whims of someone completely random, for any reason.

[0]: https://www.aurasalla.eu/en/2025/05/26/mep-aura-salla-micros...
by r00f | 2025-09-25 18:01:16+00:00
It is not Cloudflare's fault. It means the website operators were so fed up with bots and bad actors that they just applied a carpet ban and called it a day. Thanks to Cloudflare I was able to reduce my website load threefold and downscale my VMs and my monthly cloud bill, and seeing how 50k daily requests were shown CAPTCHA and not even tried to solve it makes me terrified of running anything without Cloudflare.

Don't blame site owners and service that is trying to help them. Blame the fact that 90% of today's Internet traffic is bots
by fizzynut | 2025-09-25 18:01:22+00:00
A new feature that fundamentally changes the way a lot of code is structured.

A group of features that only combined produce a measurable output, but each one does not work without the others.

A feature that will break a lot of things but needs to be merged now so that we have time for everyone to work on fixing the actual problems before deadline X as it is constantly conflicting every day and we need to spend time on fixing the actual issues, not fixing conflicts.
by toomuchtodo | 2025-09-25 18:01:32+00:00
Depends on your interests I believe. I have nostalgia from my younger years of war dialing (and poking in places I shouldn't have), building racks of x86 machines for distributed.net (rc5 and des brute forcing) in my basement bedroom, typing BASIC programs into an Atari 800xl from gamer mags stored on cassettes and 5.25 floppies, but not the rest of the life experience during that part of the timeline. Perhaps a bit of escapism and comfortable memories as well.
by xp84 | 2025-09-25 18:01:47+00:00
Question for the Cloudflare people: We use sendgrid today, and create subaccounts through it (entirely with API calls) to allow our customers to add and verify their own domains (with a couple of DNS entries the customer can create). Then we can send out email on their behalf "from" their domains -- with DKIM, SPF, and all that still being happy.

Does the Cloudflare email routing product provide this same capability?
by kamranjon | 2025-09-25 18:01:57+00:00
Can this be interpreted as anything other than a scheme to charge you for hidden token fees? It sounds like they're asking users to just hand over a blank check to OpenAI to let it use as many tokens as it sees fit?

"ChatGPT can now do asynchronous research on your behalf. Each night, it synthesizes information from your memory, chat history, and direct feedback to learn what’s most relevant to you, then delivers personalized, focused updates the next day."

In what world is this not a huge cry for help from OpenAI? It sounds like they haven't found a monetization strategy that actually covers their costs and now they're just basically asking for the keys to your bank account.
by NoMoreNicksLeft | 2025-09-25 18:02:02+00:00
If they can't be punished for continuing to push bad laws, then they will continue to push them... because they benefit from those when they inevitably pass. So there are no solutions. You live in a world where Putin still exists, is still doing these godawful things, but the suggestion that if a politician loses an election his life is forfeit makes you fear that the things that already happen would happen. Or something. It's sort of sad.
by WinstonSmith84 | 2025-09-25 18:02:11+00:00
did you write this message with ChatGPT?

> .. like smaller, less traceable bombs, or chemical weapons that are easily accessible and lead to higher casualties ..

it's very easy to build a bomb, you just need to "google" and make your shopping... Killing random people in the street is easy too, you have, among others, knifes - very easy to buy and commit a crime in side streets, etc.
by atq2119 | 2025-09-25 18:02:42+00:00
Agreed. There is no sane reason why live translation and/or its privacy properties should depend on the specific headphones used. Even if the live translation were to happen in the headphones themselves, that should only tie the availability of the feature to the headphones. The privacy implications ought to be orthogonal.

I see three possibilities. Either the whole thing is made up entirely by Apple for bad faith reasons. Or some non-technical person with bad faith motivations at Apple suffered from some internal misunderstanding. Or somebody at Apple made some incredibly bad technical decisions.

Basically, there's no way that this isn't a screw up by somebody at Apple in some form. We just can't say which it is without additional information.
by glenneroo | 2025-09-25 18:02:42+00:00
Welcome to the HN/Social Media/Internet/Humanity! If someone has special needs that can't be fulfilled by X, they will make known about their experience and tirelessly defend against why X isn't usable for them, often with a list of reasons (I personally have a txt file full of reasons not to use X, Y, Z). It definitely doesn't mean everyone is that way, they are simply sharing their personal views on why they can't/won't use X. Arguing about this seems generally futile, as their point must be made and their opinion will probably not change regardless of anything you say.

I myself am guilty of this in the past, and I hope GP does not take offense at my writing this, as I don't intend to offend. I think it's just a feature/bug of humanity... some underlying mechanism that can possibly only be explained with psychology of lizard brains or something ;)
by NitpickLawyer | 2025-09-25 18:03:12+00:00
It's pretty good and fast af. At backend stuff is ~ gpt5-mini in capabilities, writes ok code, and works good with agentic extensions like roo/kilo. My colleagues said it handles frontend creation so-so, but it's so fast that you can "roll" a couple of tries and choose the one you want.

Also cheap enough to not really matter.
by mathstuf | 2025-09-25 18:03:13+00:00
This is truer now that `git bisect --first-parent` exists. But it didn't always. And even then, there are times you find out that there is "prep work" to land your feature. And a PR just to do some deck chair moving that makes a follow-up commit easier is kind of useless. I have done prep work as a separate PR, but this is usually when it is more extensive than the feature and it is worthwhile on its own.

Another instance is a build system rewrite. There was a (short) story of the new system itself and then a commit per module on top of that. It landed as 300+ commits in a single PR. And it got rebased 2-3 times a week to try and keep up as more bits were migrated (and new infra added for things other bits needed). Partial landing would have been useless and "rewrite the build system" would have been utter hell for both me developing and anyone that tries to blame across it if it hadn't been split up at least that much.

Basically, as with many things in software development, there are no black-and-white answers here.
by adolph | 2025-09-25 18:03:32+00:00
> locals in the rural town and are comfortable being poor and living that life

> all the stress of being poor in a metro city

Is it generally accepted that people in similar economic circumstances have improved life satisfaction in rural areas? It is counterintuitive to me given any city typically has better low cost amenities like museums, libraries, and parks than rural areas that I have observed.
by Xelbair | 2025-09-25 18:03:51+00:00
this also assumes that criminals or terrorists will just follow the law.

you can always establish encrypted channel via DH over stenography in plaintext messaging, and just use any encrypted protocol.

if hardware is compromised a black market for such devices will surface.

Worst case scenario you create gigantic one time pads and just use them.

the whole idea is flawed as you get neither security nor privacy. in fact - it actually opens you to abuse if encryption is backdoored. Not to mention it being a gigantic slippery slope argument.

and most importantly - how to you ensure that you can ALWAYS trust your government with such powers?
Hypothetical thought: Open AI announces ads on ChatGPT, what happens next?
by MO-379 | 2025-09-25 18:04:32+00:00
Lately I've been thinking about missed opportunities like crypto in 2010 etc etc, and I got to a scenario where open ai or any/all of the bigger labs introduce some kind of ads into their systems, of course, they make it tolerable with an accessible off switch...but the genie is out of the bottle if anyone does anything like that.

What do you think happens next, what doors might open for developers and how can any random developer like myself or you remotely benefit from this ?

This might be a trivial case, but pessimistically for myself or anyone thinking to capitalise, it's likely the case that open AI just sells to the highest bidder and no oppertunity are open in any way for anyone else to benefit. In which case...we move on.

Anyways, all of this is late night thinking so I'm not really expecting anything, but curious as to your insights, either about how to profit or in general about what that might feel like...dystopian ? Inevitable ?...

Cheers.
by daemonologist | 2025-09-25 18:04:44+00:00
There several reasons responses from the same model might vary:

- "temperature" - intentional random sampling from the most likely next tokens to improve "creativity" and help avoid repetition

- quantization - running models with lower numeric precision (saves on both memory and compute, without impacting accuracy too much)

- differences in/existence of a system prompt, especially when using something end-user-oriented like Qwen Chat

- not-quite-deterministic GPU acceleration

Benchmarks are usually run at temperature zero (always take the most likely next token), with the full-precision weights, and no additions to the benchmark prompt except necessary formatting and stuff like end-of-turn tokens. They also usually are multiple-choice or otherwise expect very short responses, which leaves less room for run-to-run variance.

Of course a benchmark still can't tell you everything - real-world performance can be very different.