MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by niwtsol | 2025-09-25 20:08:14+00:00
I moved my prime account to be on a family plan. Their systems sent me, IDK, 15 messages telling me my prime benefits were going away and to sign up. Either they completely do not cross validate that I had moved to another prime subscription, or, based off my read of this article, they really just wanted two people in the same household paying for prime for no reason.
by vlovich123 | 2025-09-25 20:08:16+00:00
> Now that we have a Vec with no non-static lifetimes, we can safely move it to another thread.

I liked most of the tricks but this one seems pointless. This is no different than transmute as accessing the borrower requires an assume_init which I believe is technically UB when called on an uninit. Unless the point is that you’re going to be working with Owned but want to just transmute the Vec safely.

Overall I like the into_iter/collect trick to avoid unsafe. It was also most of the article, just various ways to apply this trick in different scenarios. Very neat!
by godelski | 2025-09-25 20:08:47+00:00
First off, why are you talking to me as if I don't have a PhD? I understand you've been in academia longer, but we are peers. You don't need to talk to me like I don't know the first thing about how academia works.

Second off, we do work in different fields. Do you truly believe the way things work in your field are going to directly apply to STEM fields? Because

> Most foundational research also has no quantifiable ROI

This is a strange statement to me, even if we're applying to pure mathematics. I even gave one example already.

> If someone's area is deeply unpopular and most people think the area or approach has no merits, then nobody will replicate it either

This is completely orthogonal. There's a huge difference between nothing being replicated because no one wants to attempt it and no one replicating something because you are actively discouraged to do so. A neutral incentive is not the same as a stick.

> Otherwise, the "misfit" is bound to publish in fringe journals with no quality control and nobody will ever check whether the work makes sense.

Well it seems you absolutely ignored my point about how I review. Those concerns go away if you start evaluating works by their own merit and not comparatively. There's no physical limit to how many works a journal can publish, so there's no reason to target a rejection rate.

How do you not see this as a huge problem? If a *factually correct*[0] paper is unable to publish in main stream venues then we have entirely fucked up the system.

[0] We're not talking philosophy here where things are entirely subjective. We're talking about systems with verifiable results. If you disagree with this, then let's work with the philosophical thought experiment and pretend such verifiable results are possible.
by SXX | 2025-09-25 20:09:22+00:00
Getting rid of Flash was never ever about using HTML5 for Apple. It was always to obviously to make battery life better and ofc adding more experiences to their walled garden store.

Safari is lagging on HTML5 features for decade far behind Firefox. And any features useful for "PWA" is just sabotaged. E.g like Screen Wake Lock API finally implemented in iOS 16 but to this day broken on Home screen. And like not quite obvious to use in Safari too.

Because working web standards support would make cross platform mobile apps possible outside of App Store.
by SilverElfin | 2025-09-25 20:09:31+00:00
Is it collective punishment or just really difficult to successful take down terrorists, destroy their weapons, and free hostages when they hide among civilians in a highly dense place? How would you suggest a country like Israel could definitely put an end to Hamas so their citizens are not experiencing risk? And how do you separate the “civilians” from Hamas when they voted for Hamas, support them today, and so on, knowing full well what their goals are (religious supremacy and genocide)?
by ack_complete | 2025-09-25 20:10:04+00:00
> Efficient TSO emulation is crucial (both on Windows and elsewhere)

Yes, but this is not in contention...? No one is disputing that TSO semantics in the emulated x86 code need to be preserved and that it needs to be done fast, we're talking about the tradeoffs of also having TSO support on the host platform.

> The blog claims hardware TSO is non-ideal on Windows only (because Microsoft adapted the ecosystem to facilitate software-based TSO emulation). (Even then, it's unclear if the author quantified the concrete impact)

> Hardware TSO is still of tremendous value on systems that don't have ecosystem support

That isn't what the author said. From the article:

> Another common misconception about Rosetta is that it is fast because the hardware enforces Intel memory ordering, something called Total Store Ordering. I will make the argument that TSO is the last thing you want, since I know from experience the emulator has to access its own private memory and none of those memory accesses needs to be ordered. In my opinion, TSO is ar red herring that isn't really improving performance, but it sounds nice on paper.

That is a direct statement on Rosetta/macOS and does not mention Prism/Windows. How correct that assessment may be is another matter, but it is not talking about Windows only.

> Those applications would still benefit from ARM64EC (i.e. native system libraries), but the actual application code would be affected quite badly by the TSO impact then, depending on how good their fallback heuristics are.

I will have to check this, I don't think it's that bad. JITted programs run much, much better on my Snapdragon X device than the older Snapdragon 835, but there are a lot of variables there (CPU much faster/wider, Windows 11 Prism vs. Windows 10 emulator, x86 vs x64 emulation). I have a program with native x64/ARM64 builds that runs at -25% speed in emulated x64 vs native ARM64, I'm curious myself to see how it runs with volatile metadata disabled.
by wat10000 | 2025-09-25 20:10:05+00:00
It may not be the absolute most useless, but it's awfully niche. You can use it to transfer money if you live somewhere with a crap banking system. And it's very useful for certain kinds of crime. And that's about it, after almost two decades. Plenty of other possibilities have been proposed and attempted, but nothing has actually stuck. (Remember NFTs? That was an amusing few weeks.) The technology is interesting and cool, but that's different from being useful. LLM chatbots are already way more generally useful than that and they're only three years old.
by pizlonator | 2025-09-25 20:10:53+00:00
What does “worked pretty well” really mean though?

When we talk about JS or Java JITs working well, we are making statements based on intense industry competition where if a JIT had literally any shortcoming then a competitor would highlight it in competitive benchmarking and blog posts. So, the competition forced aggressive improvements and created a situation where the top JITs deliver reliable perf across lots of workloads.

OTOH PyPy is awesome but just hasn’t had to face that kind of competitive challenge. So we probably can’t know how far off from JS JITs it is.

One thing I can say is when I compared it to JSC by writing the same benchmark in both Python and JS, JSC beat it by 4x or so.
by jMyles | 2025-09-25 20:10:57+00:00
> You're seriously suggesting that any policy that doesn't 100% eliminate a problem is a joke?

I think a more charitable reading is that any policy that doesn't 100% _target_ a problem is a joke. This policy doesn't have a plausible way that it will protect children from being victimized, so I think it's reasonable to remove the "think of the children" cloak it's wearing and assess it on the merits of whether encryption is beneficial for the social discourse of a society.
by lexarflash8g | 2025-09-25 20:10:59+00:00
I'm thinking OpenAI's strategy is to get users hooked on these new features to push ads on them.

Hey, for that recipe you want to try, have you considered getting new knives or cooking ware? Found some good deals.

For your travel trip, found a promo on a good hotel located here -- perfect walking distance for hiking and good restaraunts that have Thai food.

Your running progress is great and you are hitting strides? Consider using this app to track calories and record your workouts -- special promo for 14 day trial .
by Zak | 2025-09-25 20:11:10+00:00
There are several factors that make this situation especially suitable for regulation.

The most important is that airlines have the ability and motivation to force passengers to accept unfavorable terms, and passengers have no ability to negotiate more favorable terms. Many routes are only served by one airline, so there isn't even competitive pressure in those cases. There's also a financial incentive for airlines to mistreat customers, e.g. by overbooking flights, canceling underbooked flights, and delaying non-mandatory maintenance until the cheapest or most convenient time.
by AnthonyMouse | 2025-09-25 20:11:47+00:00
There is more than one possible structure to sustain an active constraint against power grabs, to be sure. But a Senate elected by the state governments was effective in doing it for as long as it was in place. There are other things that could work instead, but sometimes the old thing only stopped working because it stopped happening. And either way you would still need the something else to be used instead rather than continuing the status quo which is objectively not achieving the intended purpose.
by mvdtnz | 2025-09-25 20:12:08+00:00
> You should care because if the author cared enough to make descriptive atomic commits, they will help you understand why a particular change was done. This can often avoid unnecessary discussions.

That's what the description field is for. I never, ever inspect the "commits" tab in a PR unless I see some lucicrous number on it. And even then it's just to see what the heck happened.

> If the PR includes superfluous commits, then they should be squashed into the appropriate commit.

This happens on merge if your Github is set up correctly.

> Squashing the entire PR when it includes multiple changes is simply a bad practice.

The bad practice is the PR changing multiple distinct things.

> It's bad because you lose all the history of how the overall change was done, which will be useful in the future when you need to do a blame, cherry pick, bisect, etc.

It's not.
by quotemstr | 2025-09-25 20:12:30+00:00
> Even if it were stable, it only works with slices of primitive types, so we’d have to lose our newtypes (SymbolId etc).

That's weird. I'd expect it to work with _any_ type, primitive or not, newtype or not, with a sufficiently simple memory layout, the rough equivalent of what C++ calls a "standard-layout type" or (formerly) a "POD".

I don't like magical stdlibs and I don't like user types being less powerful than built-in ones.

Clever workaround doing a no-op transformation of the whole vector though! Very nearly zero-cost.

> It would be possible to ensure that the proper Vec was restored for use-cases where that was important, however it would add extra complexity and might be enough to convince me that it’d be better to just use transmute.

Great example of Rust being built such that you have to deal with error returns and think about C++-style exception safety.

> The optimisation in the Rust standard library that allows reuse of the heap allocation will only actually work if the size and alignment of T and U are the same

Shouldn't it work when T and U are the same size and T has stricter alignment requirements than U but not exactly the same alignment? In this situation, any U would be properly aligned because T is even more aligned.
by hashim | 2025-09-25 20:12:33+00:00
Do you really think Hamas has killed more Israelis than Israel has killed Palestinians? Do you even know why Hamas exists? Do you have any idea how many years passed between the occupation in 1948 and massacres like the Nakba and Deir Yassin before Hamas was established? Also, no matter how much you want it to, your racism against brown people and fetishisation of "Judeo-Christian civilisation" doesn't justify killing them.
by efitz | 2025-09-25 20:12:34+00:00
I think that if Azure offers their service in Israel it has to comply with Israeli law; I don’t see why that would not govern in this case.

If Azure were providing service to the US Government then that service would be governed by US law even if the employees using the service traveled abroad; the only exception would be if service was initiated by an employee in another country under the terms for the service provider in that country, but even then likely government has contracts with the provider that would shift jurisdiction back to the US.
by bonoboTP | 2025-09-25 20:12:54+00:00
So what remains from your argument? It's been shown that Mozilla Corporation is for-profit, donations to the Mozilla Foundation do not go into the pot that pays for Firefox development, and Mozilla Corporation is 85% funded by Google.

So not independent of Google and not a non-profit.

To be clear: I use Firefox, mainly because uBlock origin is blocked on Chrome.
by text0404 | 2025-09-25 20:13:09+00:00
The headline of a news article is a way to draw the reader in. The subhead in this case was "A report from Senate Democrats says DOGE moved sensitive information to a cloud server despite the risk of 'catastrophic' impacts," with the lede (the first paragraph of the article) mentioning the lack of oversight. I can change the title if you'd prefer, but I believe that goes against HN guidelines.
by rpdillon | 2025-09-25 20:13:35+00:00
My personal project output has gone up dramatically since I started using AI, because I can now use times of night where I'm otherwise too mentally tired, to work with AI to crank through a first draft of a change that I can then iterate on later. This has allowed me to start actually implementing side projects that I've had ideas about for years and build software for myself in a way I never could previously (at least not since I had kids).

I know it's not some amazing GDP-improving miracle, but in my personal life it's been incredibly rewarding.
by basilgohar | 2025-09-25 20:13:41+00:00
Israel only survives as a vassal state of the US. Without US aid, political cover, and unconditional military support, they cannot exist. It is being made illegal to boycott Israel in the US, given them artificial economic advantages, and they receive a surprising amount of US government contracts especially in security and data related tech. They exploit the few remaining Palestinians for their own manual labor with unfair wages in their aparteid state.

All of what you said does nothing for the region as they continue to expand their own borders by stealing more and more land from their neighbors (they recently took MORE land from Syria as the new government took shape). Their achievements are marred by their vicious genocide of the Palestinian people in Gaza and increasingly genocidal behavior in the West Bank as well. Of course you'll economically prosper if you consider stealing and occupying a legitimate right of yours. They achieve all of this by bringing bloodshed and war to the region, which they call for from the US time and time again.

How many times has Bibi Netanyahu gone before Congress to pull the US into another war in the Middle East? The US foots the bill to weaken their neighbors so they stand out more. That's not an economic achievement to be proud of or boasting about.

They can have all the startups they want, but they have the worst human rights record of any country currently, with the largest number of condemnations in the UN of any other country but always vetoed by the US. When you don't have to worry about being judged the same as other countries, then you are free to develop your country without worry about petty things like human rights violations as long as Uncle Sam foots the security bill and sends over more contracts.

Israel and those who unconditionally support it are complicit in its genocide.
by toast0 | 2025-09-25 20:14:01+00:00
Ok, but

> // By overriding this built-in method the corners of the vibrant view (if set) will be smooth.

If you don't override the built-in method, the corners won't be smooth. Jagged corners cause thousands of eye injuries every day.

Using (or overriding) private APIs comes with risks, but sometimes it's the only way to get things done. Of course, it comes with consequences too. Sometimes vendors test their new releases with commonly use applications and reach out when they've changed things and breakage results, but testing releases isn't webscale.
by hajile | 2025-09-25 20:14:25+00:00
NOTHING produced good code for the original Itanium which is why they switched gears REALLY early on.

Intel first publicly mentioned Poulson all the way back in 2005 just FOUR years after the original chip was launched. Poulson was basically a traditional out-of-order CPU core that even had hyperthreading[0]. They knew really early on that the designs just weren't that good. This shouldn't have been a surprise to Intel as they'd already made a VLIW CPU in the 90s (i860) that failed spectacularly.

[0]https://www.realworldtech.com/poulson/
by bigyabai | 2025-09-25 20:14:45+00:00
Dear citizens of the US:

Please stop funding, allying with and protecting the manufacturers of surveillance tools. Stop exporting Palantir products and importing privacy-destroying devices from businesses like Greyshift and Cellebrite. Insist that the US government stop shielding hackers-for-hire like NSO Group who indiscriminately lease their products for discriminatory and illegal purposes. Stop defending "OEM" control that we have all known is a stand-in for federal steering since the Snowden leaks. Stop marketing E2EE while backdooring server and client hardware for "emergency" purposes.

Do that, and you'll never be accused of hypocrisy again. Signed, a US citizen.
by jojobas | 2025-09-25 20:15:06+00:00
> Now imagine if you could get rid of all that legacy crap to make it work in the first place.

Yeah, and someone will wake from the dead and rewrite all the programs that run the world, written 20-40 years ago, that are to a large degree perfectly working under these compatibility layers.

You should be eternally grateful to MS for dedicating tons of money and some of its best people to maintaining backwards compatibility.

Apple can only afford it because pretty much nothing critical ever ran on macos.
by IIAOPSW | 2025-09-25 20:16:01+00:00
Kurt Godel rather famously claimed to have spotted logical contradictions in the US constitution, which of course is not too controversial on its own (and was probably right given who he is), but presenting this argument in response to questions about the constitution that were given as part of his citizenship test was an insane thing to try no matter how good his logic.

Amazingly he still passed.
by Yoric | 2025-09-25 20:16:13+00:00
True.

What is meaningful, I suspect, is that this reverses the usual direction of brain drain. If this is not a fluke and that reversal gets consolidated, yeah, that's really bad for the US. Alongside the $100.000 H1B, there is a chance that this could durably shift Silicon Valley-style creativity outside of the US.
by sorenjan | 2025-09-25 20:16:14+00:00
> Some of the supported models are large and wouldn't fit on most local devices.

Why would I use those models on your cloud instead of using Google's or Anthropic's models? I'm glad there are open models available and that they get better and better, but if I'm paying money to use a cloud API I might as well use the best commercial models, I think they will remain much better than the open alternatives for quite some time.
by runjake | 2025-09-25 20:16:49+00:00
> I don’t understand what goes through the developer’s mind.

I'm not defending anyone here, but sometimes it's to work around bugs in public APIs that never get fixed. And sometimes it's because some perceived needed functionality isn't exposed in public APIs.

They figure "It'd be a lot easier to use this private API. We can just fix it if it breaks.", not really realizing the ramifications, for example a lot of apps use older versions of Electron -- some even EOL.

Is the Electron team now going to backport this fix to several versions back? Sounds... involved.
by DSMan195276 | 2025-09-25 20:17:06+00:00
> I'd go read the original PR and the discussion that took place.

Until your company switches code repos multiple times and all the PR history is gone or hard/impossible to track down.

I will say, I don't usually make people clean up their commits and also usually recommend squashing PRs for any teams that aren't comfortable with `git`. When people do take the time to make a sensible commit history (when a PR warrants more than one commit) it makes looking back through their code history to understand what was going on 1000% easier. It also forces people to actually look over all of their changes, which is something I find a lot of people don't bother to do and their code quality suffers a lot as a result.
by yokoprime | 2025-09-25 20:17:09+00:00
I'm objectively faster. Not necessarily if I'm working on a task I've done routinely for years, but when taking on new challenges I'm up and running much faster. A lot of it have to do with me offloading doing the basic research while allowing myself to be interrupted; it's not a problem that people reach out with urgent matters while I'm taking on a challenge I've only just started to build towards. Being able to correct the ai where I can tell it's making false assumptions or going off the rails helps speed things up
by sph | 2025-09-25 20:17:23+00:00
> Start a revolution? You have no weapons.

LOL. People nowadays don't start revolutions not because of weapons or lack thereof. It's because they're thoroughly entertained and fed; even the entire political circus is a sort of morbid reality show: people tune in to the news to shake their head in disgust at today's latest antics, and will do so tomorrow, because it's all panem et circenses for grown-ups.

The Internet has become the greatest instrument of mass control ever created in the history of the world. It's done. As long people have their Doordash and Netflix, and are too busy working or scrolling instead of thinking deep thoughts, and reading anarchist philosophy, the kings has nothing to fear.

Also, no need to single out the EU. The entire government-as-reality-TV is well and truly an American creation, and your three-letter agencies don't even have to pass any laws to collect information about its citizens. We're all in the same shit, my brother/sister.
by insane_dreamer | 2025-09-25 20:17:49+00:00
Even if non-profit groups are paying high salaries (usually to retain talent), it's very different than profits going to shareholders. The purpose of a _for-profit_ company is to deliver returns to its shareholders. Therefore, decisions are inherently biased towards increasing that value as much as possible. Whereas the purpose of a non-profit is not to pay high salaries to its CEOs, and therefore decisions aren't biased towards that, nor does the CEO's salary grow relative to the hospital's growth. (The hospital increasing its profit margin by 15% doesn't mean the CEO's salary goes up by 15% -- whereas it would mean that shareholder value increases by 15%.)
by zh3 | 2025-09-25 20:17:54+00:00
Andy Grove, "Only the paranoid survive":-

Quote: Business success contains the seeds of its own destruction. Success breeds complacency. Complacency breeds failure. Only the paranoid survive.

- Andy Grove, former CEO of Intel

From wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Grove#Only_the_Paranoid...

Takeaway: Be paranoid about MBAs running your business.