MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by bigyabai | 2025-09-26 16:52:03+00:00
> In a decade we may meet people who seem to inhabit alternate universes because they’ve shared so little with others.

I get what you're saying here, but all of these mechanisms exist already. Many people are already desperate for attention in a world where they won't get any. Many of them already turn to the internet and invest an outsized portion of their trust with people they don't know.
by fluoridation | 2025-09-26 16:52:05+00:00
Eh. It didn't really feel like Deus Ex to me, spiritually. I think Prey (2017) hits way closer. I haven't played the System Shocks, so I don't know if they were aiming for that or for Deus Ex. I've heard some people from Looking Glass went to Arkane. It seems like there's only 5-10 people in the world who know how to make immersive sims and keep making action RPGs where you can upgrade your body and have quests with multiple viable approaches.
by mikewarot | 2025-09-26 16:52:32+00:00
This isn't unique to AI, it's a danger anytime you outsource things. Look at the stories we've had with a single programmer working for multiple companies. If they manage to keep up the appearance of being a full timer, all those companies will end up with the same quirks in their products, because the person just copy/pasted things.

We've seen this across culture, for instance there are "Russian Endings" to stories, which leave things...
by renewiltord | 2025-09-26 16:52:45+00:00
I think that just like Luigi Mangione acted against the law to do a thing that he wanted and lots of people think that's fine; you should be unsurprised that Flock is acting against the law to a do a thing that they want.

If you condone violation of the law, it will become commonplace. Acting like your violations of the law are fine but others' violations of the law aren't fine is a position you can take but considering that you're in the minority on both, I don't think it's going to result in anything. Sleep with the dogs, wake up with fleas.

EDIT: And I'll add some facts here and an example to my last statement here:

Luigi Mangione's act is a minority approved act actually https://archive.is/hXNhj

So about 18% approve of his act.

And no, in the US the will of the majority is not sufficient. There are damping influences on time-localized desires by design. A typical example might be that California's Proposition 8 banned gay marriage but was nonetheless struck down by the California Supreme Court. The will of the majority is not irrelevant but it is not paramount.
by dang | 2025-09-26 16:52:55+00:00
That may be so.

Generally speaking, it's not against HN's rules to be wrong. How could it be? We're all wrong about nearly everything. But it is against HN's rules to post disrespectfully, put others down, etc. - for the obvious reason that it poisons community discussion, plus is unnecessary.

It's especially important to follow those rules when one is right about something, because when a post contains both correctness and poison, the poison has has the side effect of discrediting the truth. That is bad for all of us (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...).
by mrguyorama | 2025-09-26 16:52:59+00:00
>I find the trend for uber-realistic military sims like DCS and such kind of sad in a way.

But things like Ace Combat, "H.A.W.X", War Thunder, Project Wingman, Nuclear Option, all those games are incredibly popular. The arcade combat genre is alive and well.

I do wish games like VTOL VR, DCS, and other more serious sims had a "maybe don't make me read 700 pages of manual to lock and fire a missile" option. Even something as simple as VTOL VR telling me exactly what machine my targeting pod is locked onto would be nice. Just give me a name and basic specs. It's a damn game, I shouldn't need to memorize target silhouettes unless I want to.

IL-2 Sturmovik: Great Battles actually does this well, with an entire page of "simplify things please" options.
by christianqchung | 2025-09-26 16:53:03+00:00
> Not sure what car ownership looks like, and I haven’t been in years, but I’d imagine it’s still much more than just 20%

I said "less than 80% car ownership", not "80% do not own a car". Technically these are not mutually exclusive but I think you read it as the second one. I haven't really found much analysis about how public transit interfaces with self driving cars honestly.
by nobody9999 | 2025-09-26 16:53:05+00:00
>Would you try such a crossword?

As a long time cruciverbalist (40+ years), I would hate it.

Not because it's interactive, but because it adapts to the solver. Which kind of defeats the purpose of doing a crossword.

Which is to stretch your understanding of language and vocabulary. Adapting to "your solving speed and skill," is dumbing down the crossword -- which is the opposite of that.

Yuck!
by jennyholzer | 2025-09-26 16:53:16+00:00
I want to provide a counter perspective, which is that I am very happy with way in which the website deconstructs the book into short "articles".

What I mean is that I think this website (at least from my perspective) has a successful, novel approach to representing books on the web.

I don't mean to discount your point. UX issues are very serious and can ruin an otherwise carefully presented work. My point is that despite these issues, I am impressed by the creator's approach to the website.
by MisterTea | 2025-09-26 16:53:22+00:00
> It's not the DoD, but this is happening out in the open at DHS where the secretary is requiring her personal sign-off on any purchase over $100k[0] when the previous limit was $25M.

This is EXACTLY what the PE firm did to my company after acquisition to "cut costs" and make numbers go up. I used to be able to sign off on my own purchase reqs up to $2000. That allowed me to easily acquire just about anything I needed and get my work done. Now I have to have EVERYTHING signed off on by upper management. As If I was an irresponsible spendthrift throwing money away on spare parts we actually needed. It's useless performative micromanagement by incompetent people. It's honestly insulting.
by mathgradthrow | 2025-09-26 16:53:35+00:00
This seems like an object lesson in making sure that the right hand does not know what the left is doing. Yes, if you have two departments working on two mutually exclusive architectures, one of them will necessarily fail. In exchange, however, you can guarantee that it will be the worse one. This is undervalued as a principle since the wasted labor is more easily measured, and therefore decision making is biased towards it.
by ChrisMarshallNY | 2025-09-26 16:54:07+00:00
Lawyers have had the answer to this for a couple of hundred years.

Have multiple copies of everything, at the time of signing. I usually get two copies of a contract. I sign them both, the other party signs them both, and we each get a copy. Same with any amendments or codicils.

We are each responsible for maintaining our own copy.

There should be a way to do this digitally.
by testfrequency | 2025-09-26 16:54:49+00:00
I didn’t like mine at all.

Could never find the right surface to put it on, the weird positioning meant either air points up or down - no in-between preference.

Lastly, the most annoying, the amount of dust that would be persistent on the large center pad area, so I always felt like it was just blowing old dust on me.

I dropped mine off at a donation site. Hopefully someone finds joy in it.
by bobbiechen | 2025-09-26 16:55:00+00:00
(creator here) Nope, you're right - this is a bastardized AT URI of at://<did>/<rkey> . It's missing the middle $type part, which is always `app.bsky.feed.post` in this site.

(I think I did this to get more screen real estate or something, but I should probably explain it on the page)

Thanks!
by jennyholzer | 2025-09-26 16:55:27+00:00
Could you post the names of some influential books or articles from the Information Architecture scene?

I've never heard of it, but I'm impressed by OP's website and I'm interested in learning more.

edit: There's a whole list in the website.

edit (pt. 2): How would you compare the Information Architecture scene to the Effective Altruism scene? Are these scenes linked/overlapping in any particular way?
by wahnfrieden | 2025-09-26 16:55:29+00:00
Yes. Naziism is terrorism. People lose their jobs for publicly supporting terrorism. The employee was self-proclaimed "Nazi" (including to quote, "I'm a nazi", posted publicly while working there) per views and advocacy. They also took over leadership of "GNAA" from Weev (a Nazi with Nazi tattoos etc.) while employed at Cloudflare (I won't type out what it stands for here)
by Analemma_ | 2025-09-26 16:55:42+00:00
Factorio's dev blog is a great deal of fun. It's on pause at the moment after the release of 2.0, but if you go through the archives there's great stuff in there. A lot of it is about optimizations which only matter once you're building 10,000+ SPM gigafactories, which casual players will never even come close to, but since crazy excess is practically what defines hardcore Factorio players it's cool to see the devs putting in the work to make the experience shine for their most devoted fans.
by datadrivenangel | 2025-09-26 16:55:42+00:00
The problem with cutting off one of the legs, is that the legs are related!

Outside content like email may also count as private data. You don't want someone to be able to get arbitrary email from your inbox simply by sending you an email. Likewise, many tools like email and github are most useful if they can send and receive information, and having dedicated send and receive MCP servers for a single tool seems goofy.
by Joel_Mckay | 2025-09-26 16:55:46+00:00
It is funnier if you've ever dealt with mystery packet runts, as most network appliances still do not handle them very cleanly.

UDP/QUIC can DoS any system not based on a cloud deployment large enough to soak up the peak traffic. It is silly, but it pushes out any hosting operation that can't reach a disproportionate bandwidth asymmetry with the client traffic. i.e. fine for FAANG, but a death knell for most other small/medium organizations.

This is why many LAN still drop most UDP traffic, and rate-limit the parts needed for normal traffic. Have a nice day =3
by rybosworld | 2025-09-26 16:55:48+00:00
Here's a better question:

What are the odds that a cheating accusation accurately identifies an instance of cheating?

I don't say this lightly: Kramnik very likely has some sort of untreated psychiatric disorder. He is effectively a lolcow in the chess community because he regularly (as in, almost daily) accuses much better chess players of cheating.

It's honestly a bit undignified to treat his accusation against Nakamura as anything other than a man yelling at the sky.
by sdenton4 | 2025-09-26 16:56:17+00:00
Bridge builders mostly don't have to design for adversarial attacks.

And the ones who do focus on portability and speed of redeployment, rather than armor - it's cheaper and faster to throw down another temporary bridge than to build something bombproof.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armoured_vehicle-launched_brid...
by n4r9 | 2025-09-26 16:56:24+00:00
A few posts above you said:

> Everything Tommy Robinson has said is true ... Nothing he says or does is violent or illegal

Given that he committed libel - which involves making false statements and is illegal - will you at least admit that you were wrong?

Perhaps you take the niche position that libel should be legal. But at least have the decency to concede that it is currently illegal.
by sarchertech | 2025-09-26 16:57:17+00:00
She said that all the time means more than 1 out of 100 reads but less than 5. It also takes longer for them to discuss a read than it does for them to do the read.

She also said that she frequently talks to the them before ordering scans to consult on what imaging she’s going to order.

> It's sort of like saying "sometimes a cab driver talks to passengers and suggests a nice restaurant nearby, so you can't automate it away with a self-driving cab."

It’s more like if 3/100 kids who took a robot taxi died, suffered injury, had to undergo unnecessary invasive testing, or were unnecessarily admitted to the hospital.
by danaris | 2025-09-26 16:57:54+00:00
> If you care about the tiny fraction of the total number being stored by the government, frankly you should care a lot more about all the data being stored by TooBigTech.

And what makes you think we don't?

It's much, much easier to stop new incursions into our privacy than to claw back privacy we've already lost. And it's much, much easier to stop the government from violating our privacy than to stop megacorporations accountable to no one for anything other than profit from doing so.

I think seeing hypocrisy here is being extremely uncharitable.
by seesthruya | 2025-09-26 16:58:10+00:00
Hi aabajian, thanks for replying!

I might quibble with your math a little. Most CTs have more than 100 images, in fact as you know stroke protocols have thousands. And many scans are reconstructed with different kernels, i.e. soft tissue, bone, lung. So maybe your number is a little low.

Still your point is a good one, that there is probably a finite number of imaging presentations possible. Let's pre-dictate them all! That's a lot of RVUs, where do I sign up ;-)

Now, consider this point. Two identical scans can have different "correct" interpretations.

How is that possible? To simplify things, consider an x-ray of a pediatric wrist. Is it fractured? Well, that depends. Where does it hurt? How old are they? What happened? What does the other wrist look like? Where did they grow up?

This may seems like an artificial example but I promise you it is not. There can be identical x-rays, and one is fractured and one is not.

So add this example to the training data set. Now do this for hundreds or thousands of other "corner cases". Does that head CT show acute blood, or is that just a small focus of gyriform dystrophic calcification? Etc.

I guess my point it, you may end up being right. But I don't think we are particularly close, and LLMs might not get us there.
by bubblyworld | 2025-09-26 16:58:44+00:00
Honestly like 99% of the time when I join two ropes I just use an overhand knot, sometimes with a stopper so it doesn't roll. It's pretty normal in climbing and supposedly bomber (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QGqGlFc3oFs). Agree most important thing is using them right.
by lurk2 | 2025-09-26 16:59:04+00:00
> What's the difference in the lawsuit scenario if a doctor messes up?

Scale. Doctors and taxi drivers represent several points of limited liability, whereas an AI would be treating (and thus liable for) all patients. If a hospital treats one hundred patients with ten doctors, and one doctor is negligent, then his patients might sue him; some patients seeing other doctors might sue the hospital if they see his hiring as indicative of broader institutional neglect, but they’d have to prove this in a lawsuit. If this happened with a software-based classifier being used at every major hospital, you’re talking about a class action lawsuit including every possible person who was ever misdiagnosed by the software; it’s a much more obvious candidate for a class action because the software company has more money and it was the same thing happening every time, whereas a doctor’s neglect or incompetence is not necessarily indicative of broader neglect or incompetence at an institutional level.

> If there's no regulatory blocks, then I don't see how it doesn't ultimately just become a cost comparison.

To make a fair comparison you’d have to look at how many more people are getting successful interventions due to the AI decreasing the cost of diagnosis.
by aabhay | 2025-09-26 16:59:09+00:00
The repo mentions approximate NN search but the article implies this is mainly brute force. Is there any indexing at all then? If not, is the approximate part an app-space thing e.g. storing binary vectors alongside the real ones?

In addition, if things are brute forced, wouldn’t a columnar db perform better than a row-based one? E.G. DuckDB?
by bobmcnamara | 2025-09-26 16:59:10+00:00
Could be related to UDP checksum offload.

0x0000 is a special value for some NICs meaning please calculate for me.

One NIC years ago would set 0xFFFF for bad checksum. At first we thought this was horrifyingly broken. But really you can just fallback to software verification for the handful of legitimate and bad packets that arrive with that checksum.
by ktosobcy | 2025-09-26 16:59:32+00:00
> Fascinating how divisive something optional and off-by-default can be

It may be 'off-by-default'... for now. It simply rubs me the wrong way.

> Weird how judgy people are about *free* passion-project software that has zero costs associated... almost like there's no room to be upset about it, but maybe I just mind my own business.

Well, I'm donaiting montly for a couple of years and at this point I guess it accumulated to a non-insignificant ammount so while it's FOSS and I'm not explicitly paying for it so it's not entirely free for me in the grand scheme of things ;)
by runeblaze | 2025-09-26 16:59:34+00:00
ZF(w or w/o C)/type theory/other foundations of maths are "equally" right? My argument is that even if we are trying to build PAs from scratch, type theory provides tangible benefits to the working mathematician because we can just borrow CS research in many stuffs like proof checking and synthesis.

Of course that is a benefit in the "meta" level, but it is not like ZFC is a better foundation than topoi/types/etc..
by arghwhat | 2025-09-26 16:59:38+00:00
I also imagine you wouldn't benefit from ZFS there either, even if the ARC wasn't there. You have a single application and can presumably accept occssional data loss (just fetch content upstream). Just need to handle bitrot detection, but there's ways to get around that application-side.

Better to just have the filesystem get out of the way and just focus on being good at raw I/O scheduling.

I wonder if FreeBSD is going to get something io_uring-esque. That's one of the more interesting developments in kernel space...
by sethhochberg | 2025-09-26 16:59:38+00:00
I've had great luck with asking the current session to "summarize our goals, conversation, and other relevant details like git commits to this point in a compact but technically precise way that lets a new LLM pick up where we're leaving off".

The new session throws away whatever behind-the-scenes context was causing problems, but the prepared prompt gets the new session up and running more quickly especially if picking up in the middle of a piece of work that's already in progress.
by bombcar | 2025-09-26 16:59:41+00:00
There’s some strange inverse, where situations we KNOW are rife with cheating have few accusations thereof (bike racing perhaps), and those that are almost certainly very rare may also have few accusations (because it’s rare).

Sometimes you have to treat any accusation as “real” just to keep the cheaters at bay. (Cheating at online bridge is rampant, and cheating at bridge competitions was and perhaps still is fraught with many scandals).

It’s often common that the cheaters really ARE very good players - they’re just looking for less work, not a goal they couldn’t obtain otherwise.
by raincole | 2025-09-26 16:59:54+00:00
Humans have a very strong tendency (and have made tremendous collective efforts) to compress context. I'm not a neuroscientist but I believe it's called "chunk."

Language itself is a highly compressed form of compressed context. Like when you read "hoist with one's own petard" you don't just think about literal petard but the context behind this phrase.
by mythz | 2025-09-26 17:00:10+00:00
The fact they are different is the point, and my preference is leaning towards the Hyprland/Omarchy approach of starting from an empty base that you script and stitch different features together (from a wider community of authors) to build my preferred DE instead of relying on a big release drops from a single vendor to provide most of a DE's features.

There's going to be room in Linux Desktops for multiple DE's, and everyone's going to have their own preference, mine's just leaning towards the Hyprland ecosystem.
by simonw | 2025-09-26 17:00:23+00:00
The "exposure to untrusted data" one is the hardest to cut off, because you never know if a user might be tricked into uploading a PDF with hidden instructions, or copying and pasting in some long article that has instructions they didn't notice (or that used unicode tricks to hide themselves).

The easiest leg to cut off is the exfiltration vectors. That's the solution most products take - make sure there's no tool for making arbitrary HTTP requests to other domains, and that the chat interface can't render an image that points to an external domain.

If you let your agent send, receive and search email you're doomed. I think that's why there are very few products on the market that do that, despite the enormous demand for AI email assistants.
by icedchai | 2025-09-26 17:00:42+00:00
It was amazing how fast that happened. I remember one startup mainly supported Sun, late 90's, early 2000's. This was for a so called "enterprise" app that would run on-prem. They wanted me to move the app to Linux (Red Hat, I think?) so they could take it to a trade show booth without reliable Internet access. It was a pretty simple port.
by ars | 2025-09-26 17:00:45+00:00
I think the total reported deaths from food issues - as reported by Hamas mind you - are in the 1,000 range. Which is still a very small number for a war zone.

> The goal is not to kill hamas, that was just the excuse, it is to clear the ground for new settlements.

Israel has explicitly stated that this is NOT the goal, are you in a position to change their policy or something? I don't get how you think you can determine their goals for them, unless you are a member of their government (are you?).

Your stated goal doesn't even make any sense - why would they even need to "clear ground" in the first place? Just go live in those houses. And if you mean "kill people", then why are the deaths so low?
by aw1621107 | 2025-09-26 17:00:47+00:00
> In SPlint you would describe something as `special` and then describe the individual elements.

Interesting. That does seem to provide more flexibility, though based on what the manual says I still feel like it's not quite to the same level as named lifetimes since `special` looks like it revolves around allocation/initialization?

At least based on a quick skim of the manual structs with non-owning pointers still seems like a potential difference since from what I can tell struct field checks are either for ownership (/@only@/ for fields by default), initialization/allocation (`partial`, state clauses), or requires overhead (/@refs@/). Nothing quite like "the data here will live for some arbitrary lifetime(s) dictated by the use context".

> Aliasing is mutual and storage refers to the region an object lives. It doesn't refer to exact pointer values.

I... think that answers my question? Some quick tests seem to bear that out as well.

> $ cat test.c

So I think I'm a bit dim and for some reason I thought Splint was not free. Sorry for the bother! I could have tried things out myself this entire time!

Good to see that /@returned@/ works like I hoped at least.