MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by OJFord | 2025-09-23 23:03:41+00:00
Seems weird to me (from nowhere near SF) that some of the cheapest things to do are to block fire stations, fire hydrants and 'fire lanes' (I assume that's like a bus lane but for fire engines, in places that's common enough for whatever reason, like right by a fire station?) - wheelchair/disability related stuff is much more penalised, but even all sorts of other 'regular' mis-parking seems for some reason slightly more expensive than blocking fire crews. Odd isn't it? Have I misunderstood?
by leakycap | 2025-09-23 23:03:59+00:00
> "Basically, they integrated a li-ion battery back into a vertical cabinet that could be effectively “trickle charged” with a standard 110 or 220 AC connection, then “dump” that charge into an EV very quickly – enabling up to 200 kW of DC fast charging without the need for expensive utility and infrastructure."

Now that's cool. The name Orange Juicer is awesome but it doesn't look like they leaned into it much with the photo in the article.
by benjiro | 2025-09-23 23:04:25+00:00
Refuting does not work... You can throw scientific study upon study, doctor upon doctor, ... negatives run deeper then positives.

In the open, it becomes normalized, it draws in more people. Do you rather have some crazies in the corner, or 50% of a population that believes something false, as it became normalized.

The only people benefiting from those dark concepts are those with financial gains. They make money from it, and push the negatives to sell their products and cures. Those that fight against it, do not gain from it and it cost them time/money. That is why is a losing battle.
by JumpCrisscross | 2025-09-23 23:05:14+00:00
> who makes it happen and enforces the rules?

Congress for the first. Either the FCC or, my preference, private litigants for the second. (Treble damages for stupid suits, though.)

> For all content or just “political”?

The courts can already distinguish political speech from non-political speech. But I don’t trust a regulator to.

I’d borrow from the French. All content within N weeks of an in the jurisdiction. (I was going to also say any content that mentions an elected by name, but then we’ll just get meme names and nobody needs that.)

Bonus: electeds get constituent pressure to consolidate elections.

Alternative: these platforms already track trending topics. So an easy fix is to slow down trending topics. It doesn’t even need to be by that much, what we want is for people to stop and think and have a chance to reflect on what they do, maybe take a step away from their device while at it.
by chucky_z | 2025-09-23 23:05:28+00:00
The CEO would've found it very easy to remove the blocker in that case (me). This is the life of small tech businesses. Also, they were modifying configuration files (php-fpm configurations iirc) and not code.

FIM is very useful for catching things like folks mucking about with users/groups because you typically watch things like /etc/shadow and /etc/passwd, or new directories created under /home, or contents of /var/spool/mail to find out if you're suddenly spamming everyone.
by array_key_first | 2025-09-23 23:06:35+00:00
I don't know why everyone pretends that having an incorrect opinion is some untouchable thing and we just have to respect it.

Everyone, you included, has opinions that they find unpalatable. Pretty much all of human history has been "cancelling" people for "incorrect opinions". I mean, what were the crusades? Or world war II?

There's no, like, gun to your head saying you have to respect things you don't respect. Some things are just not respectable. You're allowed to be like "no" and then decide to get as far away from the person as possible.

And, relatedly - you don't have to run away. You can push them away.

Its not really fair that crazy people are allowed to say crazy things then we, normal people, have to take the high ground and walk away. What if I don't want to walk away? Why do I have to leave a project like it's the plague because you said something insane?

Anyway, just my two cents.

Also, just to be clear: I don't think DHH is crazy or evil. I'm addressed the broader concept, not this specific case.
by dcreater | 2025-09-23 23:06:47+00:00
From my interpretation (which I think would match that of an attorney at the PBC):

1) Legally Enforceable: periodic self reporting of public benefit related activities 2) Not legally enforceable: the detailed scope and actual delivery/implementation of said benefits. Third party auditing

i.e. if you try going and suing OpenAI, Anthropic etc. on their stated public benefit contradicting the severe impact datacenters are having to water/electricity in some areas, im quite certain that you would lose.
by willahmad | 2025-09-23 23:07:08+00:00
They might have dozens of reasons, but they already did what they did.

Some of the reasons could be:

- mitigation of US AI supremacy

- Commodify AI use to push forward innovation and sell platforms to run them, e.g. if iPhone wins local intelligence, it benefits China, because China is manufacturing those phones

- talent war inside China

- soften the sentiment against China in the US

- they're just awesome people

- and many more
by cultofmetatron | 2025-09-23 23:07:18+00:00
if you're smart enough to learn fortran and learn to impliment and undersatnd numerical methods in it, I would argue that learning python will be an afterthought. You can learn python along with numpy in a week tops if you already understand the theory. I believe a lot of numpy libs are written in fortran code anyway though I could certainly be wrong there.
by lkey | 2025-09-23 23:07:24+00:00
These people will claim they were 'silenced' regardless. Even as they appear with their published bestseller about being silenced on every podcast and news broadcast under the sun, they will speak of the 'conspiracy' working against them at every step. The actual facts at hand almost never matter. Even at a press conference where the President is speaking on your behalf they'll speak of the 'groups' that are 'against' them, full of nefarious purpose. There is no magical set of actions that changes the incentive they have to lie, or believe lies. (except regulation of snake oil, which is not going to happen any time soon)
by LeafItAlone | 2025-09-23 23:07:42+00:00
I honestly don’t know. My libertarian foundation want me to believe that any and all ideas should be able to be spread. But with the technological and societal changes in the past 10-15 years, we’ve seen how much of a danger this can be too. A lie or mistrust can be spread faster than ever to a wider audience than previously ever possible. I don’t have solution, but what we have not is clearly not working.
by sandworm101 | 2025-09-23 23:07:56+00:00
Don't underestimate the power of this decision. Canada has been at the forefront of many internet/privacy polices over the last thirty years. Countries all over the world are dealing with similar questions. So they form committees to figure out policy, committees which boil down to people. Those people say, well, if it good enough for Canada then its probably good enough for us too.

Some of this is based on Canada's political/judicial system being more similar to international norms. Canada doesn't have the strange state/federal split of the US. Nor does it have the unwritten "constitution" of the UK. So European/Asian countries can more easily translate Canadian policy this into their systems. The IT companies appreciate this too. They will want to strike a deal in Canada because that deal will very likely be mirrored elsewhere. This finding and resulting deals will have great impact.
by calf | 2025-09-23 23:07:56+00:00
So I think this "talking point" of "LLMs are just Markov chains" is as bad, analogously, as "Your amazing invention that passes the Turing Test is justa giant LUT". Or "Your C++ program is justa FSM". It is all technically true, but it is being used subtly to dismiss/delegitimize something, instead of communicate a scientifically insightful idea. How is this different than "Humans are just collections of cells". True except we're are a very interesting type of collection! LLMs are a very interesting type of Markov chain! Haskell/Java/Ruby programs are a very interesting type of FSM! Etc. The talking point by itself is just reductionism, of which we've seen and heard variants of during other scientific revolutions.

Also, this Markov chain has size O(T^K), exponential in the token length of the context window, which is a beyond astronomically large object
by larkinrichards | 2025-09-23 23:08:37+00:00
there is -- https://data.sfgov.org/City-Infrastructure/Map-of-Street-Swe...

"undergoing maintenance" but spot check of data looks correct to me.

Street cleaning tickets are given efficiently and enforcement is conducted to minimize the time that people can't park. 2-4 parking officers drive in front of the street cleaning vehicles and ticket everyone parked. if you're watching at the time you'll see almost every car on the street pull out in front of the officers, circle the block and park right back in the same -- but now clean -- spot. those that don't get tickets.
by samtheDamned | 2025-09-23 23:08:55+00:00
A couple more fun ones:

Compose: LLAP = "emoji doing the vulcan salute"

Compose: FU = "middle finger emoji"

Compose: <3 = ♥

You can also type music notes using Compose: # + QeEsf or #: ♩♪♫♬♮♯

Source: https://www.x.org/releases/current/doc/libX11/i18n/compose/e...

edit: minor formatting and describing emojis since they don't seem to be allowed
by heavyset_go | 2025-09-23 23:09:43+00:00
I think the issue with this way of thinking is that humans think in abstractions.

Abstractions don't really exist, they're a product of the human mind, but then we apply them to nature. Calling DNA code, comparing NNs and the brain, etc. But those abstractions fall apart when you look a little too deeply at what actually happens in nature.

Is DNA code? Or is it more like a machine? Is it neither, or is it something embedded in such a complex space that our simple abstractions can't capture the full nature of its being?

When you look at the nature of DNA, it does more than simply act as code. It can edit and self-modify, self-assemble, self-replicate, it can turn genes on and off, it can perform what can be argued as computations itself. If you limit yourself to thinking of it as code, you might miss crucial ways it exists/performs in real life.
by shawneechase | 2025-09-23 23:09:54+00:00
MCP (Model Context Protocol) makes it easy for agents to expose tools. It works great… until your agent needs OAuth.

Example: you’ve got an MCP server for Gmail. The client and tool definitions all work. But there’s no secure way in the protocol to get an OAuth token. Current hacks? Hardcoded credentials, service accounts with way too much scope, or passing tokens through untrusted clients. All bad.

At Arcade.dev we’ve been working on a proposal to fix this: PR #887

. It extends MCP’s new elicitation system with a url mode. That means:

Form elicitation → for non-sensitive parameters (preferences, configs)

URL elicitation → for sensitive flows like OAuth, payments, WebAuthn

Clients just open the URL in a browser. Servers handle tokens and scopes. Credentials never touch the LLM or the client — mirroring how web auth has worked for 15+ years.

Why it matters:

Scoped OAuth without leaking secrets

Proper token refresh + revocation

Works cleanly for multi-provider auth (Gmail + Slack + GitHub, etc.)

Moves MCP closer to being production-ready, not just local demos

Spec PR link again: https://github.com/modelcontextprotocol/modelcontextprotocol...

Curious what the HN crowd thinks: does this strike the right balance between flexibility and security?
by zetazzed | 2025-09-23 23:10:00+00:00
Does Disney have a positive obligation to show animal cruelty snuff films on Disney Plus? Or are they allowed to control what people say on their network? Does Roblox have to allow XXX games showing non-consensual sex acts on their site, or are they allowed to control what people say on their network? Can WebMD decide not to present articles claiming that homeopathy is the ultimate cure-all? Does X have to share a "trending" topic about the refusal to release the Epstein files?

The reason we ban government censorship is so that a private actor can always create their own conspiracy theory + snuff film site if they want, and other platforms are not obligated to carry content they find objectionable. Get really into Rumble or Truth Social or X if you would like a very different perspective from Youtube's.
by NullCascade | 2025-09-23 23:10:01+00:00
Elon Musk's takeover of X is already a good example of what happens with unlimited free speech and unlimited reach.

Neo-nazis and white nationalists went from their 3-4 replies per thread forums, 4chan posts, and Telegram channels, to now regularly reaching millions of people and getting tens of thousands of likes.

As a Danish person I remember how American media in the 2010s and early 2020s used to shame Denmark for being very right-wing on immigration. The average US immigration politics thread on X is worse than anything I have ever seen in Danish political discussions.
by stephen_g | 2025-09-23 23:10:28+00:00
Every time Chat Control comes up, people do chime in and say talking about it like it's going to pass is 'alarmism', but every time it's raised again it gets closer.

The European people are being worn down, eventually those who want this will get it through - and unfortunately this kind of thing is extremely difficult to repeal (think of the children!)
by briHass | 2025-09-23 23:10:31+00:00
The line should be what is illegal, which, at least in the US, is fairly permissive.

The legal process already did all the hard work of reaching consensus/compromise on where that line is, so just use that. At least with the legal system, there's some degree of visibility and influence possible by everyone. It's not some ethics department silently banning users they don't agree with.
by Xcelerate | 2025-09-23 23:11:14+00:00
> a computation is a process that maps symbols (or strings of symbols) to other symbols, obeying certain simple rules[1]

There are quite a number of people who believe this is the universe. Namely, that the universe is the manifestation of all rule sets on all inputs at all points in time. How you extract quantum mechanics out of that... not so sure
by JeremyNT | 2025-09-23 23:11:17+00:00
He's been posting controversial stuff for quite a while, you certainly can't distill this to one blog post.

DHH stopped trying to cultivate an inclusive community some time ago. The ruby community can ill afford to drive away more prominent maintainers, yet that is what is happening here, as the corporate interests are aligned with DHH even if the rest of the community is not.
by CobrastanJorji | 2025-09-23 23:11:39+00:00
Yeah, there are two main things here that are being conflated.

First, there's YouTube's decision of whether or not to allow potentially dangerous misinformation to remain on their site, and whether the government can or did require them to remove it.

Second, though, there's YouTube's much stronger editorial power: whether or not to recommend, advertise, or otherwise help people discover that content. Here I think YouTube most fairly deserves criticism or accolades, and it's also where YouTube pretends that the algorithm is magic and neutral and they cannot be blamed for actively pushing videos full of dangerous medical lies.
by makeitdouble | 2025-09-23 23:11:49+00:00
> hen did we decide platforming very left-leaning positions is good, and platforming very right-leaning ones is bad?

The same way DHH can have opinions, one-man-companies forking the sponsorship momey can have some too. "We" didn't decide anything, a sponsor company decided to stop sponsoring (with no public commentary), that's all that happened.

More to the point, "platforming" is an active operation, I think anyone can decide who they want to promote and why. It's fundamentally different from censoring.
by llm_nerd | 2025-09-23 23:12:18+00:00
It didn't even make sense at the time. It tainted everything under a cloud that the official, accepted truth needed to suppress alternatives to win the battle of minds. It was disastrous, and it is astonishing seeing people (not you, but in these comments) still trying to paint it as a good choice.

It massively amplified the nuts. It brought it to the mainstream.

I'm a bit amazed seeing people still justifying it after all we've learned.

COVID was handled terribly after the first month or so, and hopefully we've learned from that. We're going to endure the negative consequences for years.

And to state my position like the root guy, I'm a progressive, pro-vaccine, medical science believer. I listen to my doctor and am skeptical if not dismissive of the YouTube "wellness" grifters selling scam supplements. I believe in science and research. I thought the worm pill people were sad if not pathetic. Anyone who gets triggered by someone wearing a mask needs to reassess their entire life.

But lockdowns went on way too long. Limits on behaviour went on way too long. Vaccine compliance measures were destructive the moment we knew it had a negligible effect on spread. When platforms of "good intentions" people started silencing the imbeciles, it handed them a megaphone and made the problem much worse.

And now we're living in the consequences. Where we have a worm-addled halfwit directed medicine for his child-rapist pal.
by gangtao | 2025-09-23 23:12:51+00:00
there are some limitations as I know:

1. Insert Performance Degradation

Users frequently complain that materialized views significantly slow down insert performance, especially when having multiple MVs on a single table.

2. Streaming Data Patterns

This is critical for ClickHouse materialized views. Streaming data often arrives in frequent, small batches, but ClickHouse performs best when ingesting data in larger batches. The materialized views' transformation query runs synchronously within the INSERT transaction for every single batch, making the fixed overhead disproportionately large for small batches

3. Block-Level Processing Limitations

MVs in ClickHouse operate only on the data blocks being inserted at that moment. When performing aggregation, a single group from the original dataset may have multiple entries in the target table since grouping is applied only to the current insert block.

4. JOIN Limitations and Memory Issues

Materialized views with JOINs are problematic because MVs only trigger on the left-most table. It's also inefficient to update the view upon the right join table since it needs to recreate a hash table each time, or else keeping a large hash table and consuming a lot of memory.

5. Reprocessing historical data requires manual ALTER TABLE operations.

6. Each materialized view will create a new part from the block over which it runs - potentially causing the "Too Many Parts" issue
by orobus | 2025-09-23 23:12:51+00:00
I can’t figure out how to get the visidata frequency analysis histograms to render properly. Some render as blocks as expected but others are those diamond-question marks. I know it’s a silly hang up but it’s what’s keeping me on iterm. It’s seemingly impossible to search for (or at least I haven’t figured out the right keywords) to troubleshoot too.
by tehjoker | 2025-09-23 23:13:41+00:00
I didn't say violence. Whatever you read into that comment is a projection. I'm not even sure violence is effective, but something more muscular than op-eds is called for. For example, labor organizing and various forms of self-defense organizations, of which there are many kinds, not only militias. For example, anti-ICE organizing which protects vulnerable people from the gestapo.
by robertoallende | 2025-09-23 23:13:53+00:00
Thanks to write such detailed article... lot of very well supported information.

I've been working on something what I call Micromanaged Driven Development https://mmdd.dev and wrote about it at https://builder.aws.com/content/2y6nQgj1FVuaJIn9rFLThIslwaJ/...

I'm in a similar search and I'm stoked to see that many people riding the wave of coding with AI is moving in this direction.

Lots of learning ahead.
by jjk166 | 2025-09-23 23:14:30+00:00
One is not immune to being a Nazi because they are not evil, being a Nazi makes people evil. Much of the horror of the Nazis was that seemingly normal, reasonable people committed those atrocities; many without even considering that what they were doing was wrong until after the fact.

We do not call people Nazis because we dislike them, we dislike them because they are Nazis. Most non-Nazis, when accused of being a Nazi, point out how their views differ from the Nazis. I won't claim it's always the case, but the people who argue they can't possibly be Nazis because Nazis are bad, and they are not, typically are.

The Nazis very much were an alt-right, anti-liberal group. They were more than that; I gave a whole list of core tenets to their beliefs. Overlapping some tiny amount doesn't make someone a Nazi. Hitler being a vegetarian is not an indictment of vegetarians. But if a person were to go through the list of those 6 things the Nazis championed and find themselves championing 4 or 5 of them, it should be cause for alarm.
by yojo | 2025-09-23 23:14:43+00:00
I think there's a difference between silencing people, and having an algorithm that railroads people down a polarization hole.

My biggest problem with YouTube isn't what it does/doesn't allow on its platform, it's that it will happily feed you a psychotic worldview if it keeps you on the site. I've had several family members go full conspiracy nut-job after engaging heavily with YouTube content.

I don't know what the answer is. I think many people would rightly argue that removing misinformation from the recommendation engine is synonymous with banning it. FWIW I'd be happy if recommendation engines generally were banned for being a societal cancer, but I'm probably in the minority here.
by alex1138 | 2025-09-23 23:14:49+00:00
So the other day, I linked to something on Rumble right here on Hacker News and was told to find a better source

First of all, you can't separate a thing's content from the platform it's hosted on? Really?

Second of all, this is why

I'll just go do this again and if you flag me it's on you, you have no standing to do it (the internet is supposed to be democratic, remember?)

https://rumble.com/v28x6zk-sasha-latypova-msc.-nsa-team-enig...

https://rumble.com/v3zh3fh-staggering-17m-deaths-after-covid...

https://rumble.com/vt62y6-covid-19-a-second-opinion.html

https://rumble.com/v2nxfvq-international-covid-summit-iii-pa...

I could go on. Feel free if you want to see more. :)

(Was it misinformation when Fauci said you shouldn't rush a vaccine or all hell breaks loose years later? Or when he intimated that masks wouldn't work for covid?)
by helloericsf | 2025-09-23 23:15:12+00:00
If you're in SF, you don't want to miss this. The Qwen team is making their first public appearance in the United States, with the VP of Qwen Lab speaking at the meetup below during SF teach week. https://partiful.com/e/P7E418jd6Ti6hA40H6Qm Rare opportunity to directly engage with the Qwen team members.
by plantwallshoe | 2025-09-23 23:15:16+00:00
Isn’t promoting/removing opinions you care about a form of speech?

If I choose to put a Kamala sign in my yard and not a Trump sign, that’s an expression of free speech.

If the marketing company I own decides to not work for causes I don’t personally support, that’s free speech.

If the video hosting platform I’m CEO of doesn’t host unfounded anti-vax content because I think it’s a bad business move, is that not also free speech?