MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by Dilettante_ | 2025-09-11 01:05:17+00:00
Would love an option to adjust the "mouse sensitivity", and flicking(is that the right term? I mean that the momentum from scrolling continues even if you lift your finger from the screen). Right now movement feels a mite heavy, I'm scrolling like three times as much as I'd find comfortable.

Aside from that, this might become my new favorite time waster of the week.
by rerdavies | 2025-09-11 01:05:37+00:00
However, the reason why your son wants to go is that they want to push buttons. And those buttons have to do things. Let a pack of children loose in a childrens' museum, and what do they? Do they run from button to button to button, pushing them, often not even waiting to see the effect.

I don't see anything intrinsically worse about having a bunch of screens do the doing rather than a handful of mechanical thingamajig that would have done the doing in the previous generation of museums. What matters is the experience.

And maybe (just a suggestion), if that's not what you want, don't take them to a science museum.

Might I suggest, a natural history museum instead, where they can personally experience row upon row of awkwardly lumpen stuffed mammals collected in the 1860s, or entire rooms full of glass cases containing "minerals" (which seemed to me, as a child, to be nothing more than a fancy word for "rock").

Personally, I have great sympathy for science museums, most of which came to be in the 1970s, back when "multimedia" was something powerfully unique and special, and have since had real challenges re-inventing themselves in a world where "multimedia" is about as impressive as a toaster. (Yes, I mean you, Ontario Science Center).

And great admiration for those curators who work hard to successfully re-invent museums in the 21st century. And respect for those curators who conduct brave experiments that sometimes fall short of expectations.

I, personally, love the Royal Ontario Museum, which managed to transform its shelves full of rocks into a curated multimedia "experience" that walks children through the geological history of the planet earth using lots of buttons to push (almost all of which control screens), and an "elevator" that "descends" 600 feet underground into the heart of a mine. And this, children, is what granite looks like! Whumpf. 4 ton granite boulder!! And I'm pretty sure that was even a shelf with a leftover hunk of carbonaceous deoderantite in there somewhere, although I am uncertain on that particular point, because I was distracted by the pure genius of a museum display consisting of a 4 ton granite boulder that children could climb on. All performed while completely resisting the urge to re-invent their "Room full of Dinosaur Bones as a Temple to Science" experience. A first-class museum experience that has withstood the test of time. And they even managed to a preserve a hall full of awkwardly lumpen stuffed mammals, which serve as a reminder to visitors that museums are constantly evolving things. A display that has a button and a screen that explains that the museum has multiple warehouses full of lumpen stuffed mammals all collected in the 1860s, all of which have to be meticulously conserved for generations of future scientists despite the 1860s awfulness of it all, and that this diorama of a stuffed caribou surrounded by a snarling pack of stuffed wolves, as stuffed groundhogs look on is a vision of what a museum should be that was enormously successful in its time.
by noduerme | 2025-09-11 01:06:35+00:00
You make a good point. For example, the rule of law in North Korea or Equatorial Guinea is whatever the HMFIC says it is. And that's written in law, the police and courts enforce it, all proper and aboveboard in a legalistic sense. Just not in common sense.

As far as the poorest 10%, though: There is always a poorest 10%. And a poorest 50%. If you're in the middle class or higher, you have every reason to prevent the poor from revolting and taking what you have. This can be accomplished by a vast array of carrots and sticks. Some countries lean more toward the carrot - we call them liberal democracies. Autocratic states use the stick.

But although greater wealth inequality may be a good indicator of the tendency of the lowest 10% to become lawless, it is not a good indicator of which method is used to keep them in check. Cuba has pretty amazingly low levels of wealth inequality - essentially everyone's poor. Keeping them from rebelling, however, is all stick, precisely because any kind of economic carrot would undermine the philosophy that it's better for everyone to be poor than to have wealth inequality.
by seanmcdirmid | 2025-09-11 01:07:29+00:00
> The U.S. averages one to two mass shootings per day, with the specific rate varying by year and definition. Organizations like the Gun Violence Archive (GVA) define a mass shooting as an incident where at least four people are shot and either killed or injured, not including the shooter. For example, the GVA reported the U.S. averaged two mass shootings per day in the first half of 2023, with a record-breaking number in 2021.

Here is an Axios article where Gemini is getting its information from:

> https://www.axios.com/2023/07/31/us-mass-shooting-2-every-da...

The data is available at: https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/

We are at 300 so far this year. You can click on mass shootings and get an enumerated list for this year with incidents and sources, I'm not sure if you can go back to other years also:

https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/reports/mass-shooting

You could sample some of the incidents and see if they are being honest or not.
by aoki | 2025-09-11 01:08:02+00:00
The issue in all fields became significantly worse as developing countries decided their universities needed to become world class and demanded more international publications for promotion. Look at the universities in the table in the paper and you can see which countries are clearly gaming the system. If your local bureaucrats can’t tell which journals are good and which are fake, the fake journals become the most efficient strategy. Even worse, publishers figured out that if you can attract a few high-citation papers, your impact factor will go way up (it’s an arithmetic mean) and your fake journal becomes “high quality” according to the published citation metrics!

Math is particularly susceptible to this because there are few legitimate publications and citation counts are low. If you are a medical researcher you can publish fake medical papers but more easily become “high impact” on leaderboards (scaled by subject) by adding math topics to your subjects/keywords.
by FridayoLeary | 2025-09-11 01:08:30+00:00
I followed the mainstream media exclusively and still realised immediately that nobody actually had a clue what they were doing. My trust in MSM died then. Most alternative sources are even less reliable but i believe spreading a wider net gives me a better judgement. Whatever you do, don't exclusively outsource your opinions and judgement to the MSM. Too often they take up the same wrong narratives. This is easier said then done. Read the opinions and news even from people you despise and be honest with yourself.
by mionhe | 2025-09-11 01:09:15+00:00
And yet the founding fathers made it pretty clear that they were all for every able-bodied man having guns, including private citizens owning artillery.

The relative lethality of a particular style of rifle doesn't seem to matter. Better guns than muskets were available at the time, and they didn't seem to think it necessary to limit that amendment.

I don't think your opinions about the history and purpose of the second amendment holds water.
by potato3732842 | 2025-09-11 01:10:18+00:00
We don't have "no idea". We have god knows how many hours of the dead guy spewing his opinions in 1080p and 4k. And for all of those variety opinions we know who gets pissed off by them.

I mean, sure, it could've been a crazy ex or a former business partner or whatever. But how many crazy ex's can one guy have? And he's pissed off god knows how many people by saying things? Strictly by the numbers this was almost certainly someone who hated him for what he said.

Statistically most people don't go out like Ozzy (i.e. spend a good chunk of your life doing something likely to be the death of you only to get dead by something completely unrelated)
by busyant | 2025-09-11 01:10:32+00:00
> Also, if your grandpa likes telling war stories, it's only because he survived.

As someone whose parents, grandparents, and entire family lived in Italy through WWII (and one grandfather who lost an eye in WWI), nobody liked talking about it.

If they did talk about it, it was usually brief and imbued with a feeling of "thank God it's over. what a tragedy that we were all used as pawns by the political class for nothing more than selfish ambitions."
by chasd00 | 2025-09-11 01:11:35+00:00
Completely untrained yes but there’s lots of people with these skills. I do IDPA matches with my son at a tactical range near Waxahachie TX, people there do these kinds of drills constantly. There’s also lots of ex-military instructor led close quarter and urban combat training available to anyone. Combat trained random people are probably more common than you think. It’s sort of like martial arts, some people are just really into it.
by awesome_dude | 2025-09-11 01:12:13+00:00
My hunch was completely the opposite

Two planets in the "habitable zone" both receiving "ingredients" from the same stream of comets/meteors/cosmic dust, both with what we believe to be environments conducive to life (liquid water, surface temperatures/atmospheric pressures that aren't like Venus..:)

In fact, I'm more surprised that life didn't start independently on both planets at roughly the same time (it could turn out that life did indeed start at the same time on both planets too, just it didn't "take hold" or "last as long" on Mars)
by xdennis | 2025-09-11 01:12:16+00:00
You're a clear example of what Charlie was not. You're not respectfully engaging in this discussion.

GP said Charlie Kirk was respectful during debates. You tried to deny this, not by showing one of his college debates, but by taking out of context what he said on one of his shows.

If you actually watched his debates, you wouldn't have said that. https://www.youtube.com/@RealCharlieKirk/videos
by mouse_ | 2025-09-11 01:13:39+00:00
Nah, 2k had big problems for desktop usage. No window snapping to edges of any kind, including no win+arrow keys for tiling, maximize, minimize restore etc., you couldn't just click the bottom left hot corner to open your start menu, you actually had to click on the button that said "Start"; no opening start menu and typing "Mouse" and hitting enter to open the mouse control panel (Windows Search was truly so excellent pre-UWP settings); no desktop compositing, so all your windows will have constant screen tearing;
by int_19h | 2025-09-11 01:13:54+00:00
It's nicer for the drivers too because you don't have to lag behind a slow-moving bike in a single lane.

And, more abstractly, if a dedicated bike lane means more people taking the bicycle, that also means fewer cars on the road, making it that much more pleasant for those who continue to drive.

Speaking as someone who enjoys driving, I'm all for dedicated bike lanes, even if that means reducing car lanes.
by Barrin92 | 2025-09-11 01:14:23+00:00
>Socrates is said to have criticized writing for letting people to not train their memory

And he likely had a point. What I recently noticed is that my father, who had very little formal education but happened to have very old-school teachers who hammered him with memorizing a lot of poetry, which he continued in adult life, is more verbally fluent somehow than a lot of young kids who don't have command of grammar any more. ("would of")

Granted they likely don't write or read much either but directionally if you keep outsourcing mental work, you degrade. When I studied Japanese I liked the term a teacher had for his defense of memorizing Kanji by handwriting, which he called "neuro-muscular". Like playing scales on the guitar or piano there is something that keeps you snappy in memorization and rote practice that goes away if you only passively search.
Show HN: United PQP/PQF Earnings Calculator
by Hansenq | 2025-09-11 01:14:48+00:00
As a regular UA flyer, I often need to figure out how many PQP/PQF a specific flight on a non-UA carrier results in.

I built this calculator as part of Statusrope (my app to calculate how different itineraries help you make Premier status) and I thought I'd make the calculator itself public. This one is similar to the classic https://pqp.economiles.com calculator, but provides more explanation as to why certain PQP/PQF results are the way they are.

Feel free to send any feedback my way!
by gchamonlive | 2025-09-11 01:15:03+00:00
If I'm able to do everything I can in my regular arch Linux installation, it would be nice to try an arch derivation that is immutable by design.

What I'm affraid is to start experimenting and finding more and more that my workflow is hindered either by some software not working because the architecture of the OS is incompatible, or by KDE UX design choices in the user interface.

That's not to say that it wouldn't be interesting, and it would say nothing about the quality of the software if I'd hit such walls, only that I'm not its target audience.
by angelgonzales | 2025-09-11 01:15:29+00:00
Some years back, I had a discussion with an older woman who struck a conversation with me innocently enough about weather or something. She turned the topic to politics and volunteered an opinion, her tone and expression indicated to me that she expected me to agree with her statement. I told her that I respectfully disagreed with her and I also told her why. Her expression soured and she told me that because she was a schoolteacher she thought guns should be banned because too many children had been killed by people using guns on them. I agreed with her that it was tragic and that I hoped we could live in a world where kids wouldn’t die from people using guns on them. In my life I want to be rational and honest and I want to listen to people. I listen to people and I hope they listen to me because that’s how ideas are exchanged. I asked her how I myself could avoid becoming the victim of a genocide without guns. I wonder this myself. I’ve read about genocides, the millions of people dead in China, Russia, Germany, Poland, Africa and Gaza too, I’ve also seen rioting and violence firsthand in Los Angeles and Portland and I wonder how I can ensure that my girlfriend and I will be safe now and into the future. I have no solution except for responsible gun ownership. A few years ago our car was stolen in Portland, the police did not help and the 911 phone service was down at the time. The only way I could get the car was to physically go and pick the car up, a car surrounded by criminals, of course I needed a gun to make sure I was safe. I think about natural disasters or occasions where government is unable or unwilling to protect its citizens - how will good people defend themselves against evil people? I’ve seen violence firsthand so many times that I have a visceral reaction to the thought that someone would take my guns away - I simply wouldn’t let it happen because I know if I did then I wouldn’t be able to prevent myself from being killed and dumped in an unmarked mass grave by a 19 year old kid who thinks he’s doing the right thing because of a mandate from a politician, and I wouldn’t be able to stop evil people.

She disagreed, I disagreed with her, she made points I feel were unfair oversimplifications “guns have more rights than women,” but we had a respectful discussion but she didn’t want to talk with me anymore after that. I would’ve talked with her after because I value what people have to say and I want to have discussions. I think we can have discussions but we should never take away the rights of citizens.
by PaulDavisThe1st | 2025-09-11 01:15:49+00:00
I was not intentionally trying to diminish her.

I suspect that unless you live in New Mexico, you have no idea who the speaker of the NM House is. That's not a diminshment of the office or the person holding it, it's a recognition that while such positions come with significant power within the context of a state, they are quite hidden from residents of other states.
by dylan604 | 2025-09-11 01:17:55+00:00
Ah yes, the ever popular "over a weekend" retort. So, you have a weekend coming up. I fully expect to see your Show HN on Monday. You'd know pretty quickly on your own if you were tripping or not. I'll check back with you on Monday. I'll gladly eat a bowl of something (I'm thinking ice cream) if you have a working Show HN on Monday. I'm giving you two days of prep. Or you can take the same weekend time and provide a Show HN on Saturday. Choice is yours
by credit_guy | 2025-09-11 01:20:16+00:00
There is another premise that is faulty: that the answer to "where's everybody" is that "since we see nobody, there is nobody". But for all we know the planets around Alpha Centauri may be teaming with life, and there would be no way for us to detect that. If only 1% of the solar systems in our galaxy host intelligent life, then the number of intelligent life forms would be truly mind-boggling, yet we wouldn't be able to detect a whisper of their presence. For the simple reason that space is also mind-blowingly vast, and all signals decay with the square root of the distance.
by ribfeasty | 2025-09-11 01:21:12+00:00
The Beatles (especially John) also hated the tedium of re-recording vocals to layer them, as is common in audio production to improve the impact of vocals in recordings.

Their engineer ended up coming up with a technical approach we call ADT (Automatic double-tracking) to artificially duplicate and layer the vocals without requiring the artist(s) to re-record vocals.
by lynndotpy | 2025-09-11 01:21:19+00:00
Your view is simply one that is not in line with reality.

There's the numerous Obama assassination plots, 2017 Unite the Right rally, Jan 6, the recent assassinations of Democrat politicians, Abbott in 2024 pardoning murderer Daniel Perry who went to a BLM protest with the intention of killing protestors, and the terror groups like the Proud Boys, the 3 Percenters, The Base, the O9A/Cvlt/764.

And that's not to mention the Christchurch mosque shootings, the Club Q or Pulse Nightclub shootings, the El Paso Walmart shooting, the Jacksonville Dollar Tree shooting, or the Charleston church shooting.

And these are just the ones off the top of my head. These aren't cherry picked; the stats disagree with you too. Here is one such study, but you would be hard pressed to find one that shows otherwise: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9335287/

The right commits far more political violence. That is just a simple fact of reality.

(edit) If you are sincerely concerned about political violence, then it's worth keeping up with the far-right accelerationist movement. They have been increasing in activity since 2020, and attacks on gun proponents and conservatives are part of those plots, like The Base's foiled 2020 attack on a gun rights rally in Virginia, or the the foiled 2024 energy grid attack ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Atomwaffen_Division_me... )
by strken | 2025-09-11 01:21:49+00:00
"Some gun deaths are okay" is saying the quiet part out loud, but it's not wrong. When you let a large group of people have access to something dangerous then some number of them will die and kill using the dangerous thing, whether the thing is cars or paracetamol or wingsuits or guns.

I say this as an Australian. We have a far more restrictive system of gun control than the US and yet we still see tens of gun deaths a year, because some gun deaths are okay even if we set the number a lot lower than the US does.
by defrost | 2025-09-11 01:22:09+00:00
Meanwhile, overshadowed by the Kirk shooting, an almost mass shooting also occurred:

3 Students, Including Attacker, Shot at Colorado High School, Authorities Say

Three students, including a shooting suspect, were critically injured in a shooting at a suburban high school in Colorado on Wednesday afternoon, the authorities said.

~ https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/10/us/colorado-high-school-s...

That's just one below a common mass shooting definition threshold.

It's telling that event, leading news in any other country, will likely get buried below the Kirk shooting as "just another day in the USofA".
by marttt | 2025-09-11 01:22:22+00:00
This seems related to "ventilated prose", as invented by Buckminster Fuller: https://vanemden.wordpress.com/2009/01/01/ventilated-prose/

I can confirm that while this technique feels odd at first, it does prove very useful when you need to edit or shorten a "wall of text", or express something very concisely. Somehow, the relevant/irrelevant parts of a sentence or thought stand out better this way.

IIRC, I even wrote a simple Vimscript function back in the day to join a "ventilated" secton back into a traditional, coherent sentence.
by hakfoo | 2025-09-11 01:22:26+00:00
If we could get that sort of mindset into the AI-maximalists, particularly in the executive suite, we'd be so much better off.

Use the tools that are APPROPRIATE FOR THE SPECIFIC TASK. Even if that means we're not always using the shiny toy you're desperate to get metrics up on. You'd look like a putz going into a machine shop and yelling at the guy working a lathe "but we just bought this laser engraver, go use it now!" Why is it different for programmers or other creatives?

Maybe the AI vendors need to start broadening their products too-- sell a better lathe to go with the laser engraver.

There are a lot of problems where the developer knows roughly what they want in terms of code already. The labour savings is mostly "not having to type in 500 lines of code" and it's wasted if they instead have to spend the same amount of time trying to craft prompts and babysit the LLM. I think there's a lot of potential in the "spicy autocomplete" flow for that use case-- start with a few key lines and let the system use pattern recognition and templates to quickly infer the other 450, all within the workflow they're already productive in.
by unethical_ban | 2025-09-11 01:22:44+00:00
How can we not call a spade a spade? The United States government is being destroyed from within, openly and proudly. A handbook was written saying it would be done this way.

If someone or something is a threat to democracy and rule of law, then they are. Period. I think pretending the ruling political party in the US is not intentionally destroying the government is not a valid strategy.

This is not an endorsement of what happened today. I worry this will have a big chilling effect on political speech in the country.
by zamadatix | 2025-09-11 01:23:30+00:00
I agree with this, and, as a result, I don't believe there is any possible approach which results in 0 people assassinating political figures for what other people say. I think the same conclusion can even be reached if people were supposed to be expected to be perfectly rational beings.

I do believe education on how to effectively engage against an idea which feels threatening is better equipped to handle this apparent fact than bigstrat2003's approach of teaching people to not say certain beliefs because they'd be worth killing about. That doesn't mean it results in a perfect world though. Some may perhaps even agree with both approaches at the same time, but I think the implication from teaching the silencing of certain beliefs from being said for fear they are worth assassinating over if believed true ends up driving the very problem it sets out against. Especially once you add in malicious actors (internal or external).