MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by pictureofabear | 2025-09-28 14:24:37+00:00
This is not new. None of the Arab countries have ever fully aligned with the US. They routinely host Russia and China and buy their hardware. They will continue to host the US and buy its hardware as well.

A fundamental misunderstanding of the West is that these countries will, with time, align philosophically against the West's enemies. They are concerned with preservation of their regimes and their ways of life. They recognize that they have no foundational shared story with the West (religious or otherwise), and that without such shared origins and culture, Western people will not fight to save Arabs when resources get tight. So what do they do? Hedge their alliances so that they always have someone to turn to.
by ChrisMarshallNY | 2025-09-28 14:25:09+00:00
Eh, I think we’re reaching that wall, where folks have their minds made up, and won’t accept conflicting information. There’s a ton of that, in addiction treatment.

> You also mention true addiction, do you mean physical addiction (as opposed to psychological)?

True addiction has nothing to do with physical dependence. That’s actually a by-product of addiction. It’s entirely possible to be an addict, without ever becoming physically dependent, and also, you can become physically dependent, without becoming an addict. That happens frequently, in pain management.

But a lot of folks have their minds already set in stone, here. Lots of moralizing and theories get tossed around, while addicts die, and destroy the lives of others.

I’m not going to try explaining it here. I’ve been at this, longer than many folks have been alive, and am quite aware of the futility of trying to graft new ideas onto closed minds. I’m really too busy, helping folks out, that want it.

> It is certainly possible that what worked for you won't work on everyone else

Absolutely, but it has worked for millions, so it does have some effectiveness.
by sevensor | 2025-09-28 14:25:24+00:00
One of the things that makes typing an existing codebase difficult in Python is dealing with variance issues. It turns out people get these wrong all over the place in Python and their code ends up working by accident.

Generally it’s not worth trying to fix this stuff. The type signature is hell to write and ends up being super complex if you get it to work at all. Write a cast or Any, document why it’s probably ok in a comment, and move on with your life. Pick your battles.
by fzwang | 2025-09-28 14:26:46+00:00
If you haven't already, check out the HTMX community [1].

I think there's some recognition that a lot of SPAs didn't need to be SPAs in the first place. At the end of the day, you're just submitting a form for a CRUD app. Good ol' HTML + a sprinkle of JS was enough for most use cases. CSS has evolved to take away some of the stuff that required JS before.

At the moment, I don't think there's really any strong incentives to cut down the complexity of apps by moving away from SPAs. There's real job security in creating complexity. And in some big orgs it's unavoidable. It can change when developers are more aligned with long term outcomes (ex. a product that they own), which usually means smaller projects.

[1] https://htmx.org/
by dragontamer | 2025-09-28 14:27:40+00:00
These tutorials don't even teach horse-move, 1-point jump or similar movements though.

With so much emphasis on cut and strong play, anyone completing this set of tutorials is going to be an absurdly strong tactician and then lose 20 points as the opponent horse-moves around the board.

Surely you've played the beginner who favors tactics and capture at the expense of easily captured territory? Given this set of tutorials, do you think any beginner will understand sente, gote and tenuki? And even if a beginner somehow understood it, what basis of play will they have? There's literally no tutorial or discussion on walls, influence, 2-point jump, 1-point jump, strong vs fast play (etc. etc.)
by whilenot-dev | 2025-09-28 14:28:12+00:00
> Or is `class Pipeline[T]:` a short form of that?

Yes, since 3.12.

> Pipeline would need to change result type with each call of `add_step`, which seems like current type checkers cannot statically check.

Sounds like you want a dynamic type with your implementation (note the emphasis). Types shouldn't change at runtime, so a type checker can perform its duty. I'd recommend rethinking the implementation.

This is the best I can do for now, but it requires an internal cast. The caller side is type safe though, and the same principle as above applies:

from functools import reduce from typing import cast, Any, Callable, Mapping, TypeVar def _id_fn[T](value: T) -> T: return value class Step[T, U]: def __init__( self, metadata: Mapping[str, Any], procedure: Callable[[T], U], ) -> None: self._metadata = metadata self._procedure = procedure def run(self, value: T) -> U: return self._procedure(value) TInput = TypeVar('TInput') class Pipeline[TInput, TOutput = TInput]: def __init__( self, steps: tuple[*tuple[Step[TInput, Any], ...], Step[Any, TOutput]] | None = None, ) -> None: self._steps: tuple[*tuple[Step[TInput, Any], ...], Step[Any, TOutput]] = ( steps or (Step({}, _id_fn),) ) def add_step[V](self, step: Step[TOutput, V]) -> 'Pipeline[TInput, V]': steps = ( *self._steps, step, ) return Pipeline(steps) def run(self, value: TInput) -> TOutput: return cast( TOutput, reduce( lambda acc, val: val.run(acc), self._steps, value, ), ) def _float_to_int(value: float) -> int: return int(value) def _int_to_str(value: int) -> str: return str(value) def main() -> None: step_a = Step({}, _float_to_int) step_b = Step({}, _int_to_str) foo = Pipeline[float]()\ .add_step(step_a)\ .add_step(step_b)\ .run(3.14) print(foo) bar = Pipeline[float]()\ .run(3.14) print(bar) if __name__ == '__main__': main()
by layer8 | 2025-09-28 14:28:33+00:00
It stands in the way of them making money, and making (lots of) money is psychologically fundamental to their identity, to them feeling superior, maybe because they don’t have much else to show for, or more charitably because they haven’t been taught more healthy values as children. Anything that limits their ability to make money is hard for them to reconcile with their self-image. It’s much easier to play down, distort, or outright ignore other parts of reality in their mind.
by gedy | 2025-09-28 14:29:05+00:00
Thanks, I'm probably a kook but I've never wanted to put any non-product, user-visible feature-related tasks on the board with story points (tests, code cleanup, etc) and just folded that into the related user work (mainly to avoid some product person thinking they "own" that and can make technical decisions).

So the product velocity didn't exactly go up, but you are now producing less technical debt (hopefully) with a similar velocity, sounds reasonable.
by sleepyguy | 2025-09-28 14:29:12+00:00
The US and EU/NATO are facing growing technological obsolescence. They lack the capability to effectively counter modern threats and appear disconnected from the realities of contemporary warfare.

A clear example is NATO’s struggle to respond to Russian drone incursions. Recently, over 20 drones were launched into Polish airspace—yet only four were intercepted, at a cost of millions of dollars. The remainder crashed across Polish territory, highlighting serious gaps in air defense systems.
by prmoustache | 2025-09-28 14:29:45+00:00
For that you need to be positive the mails aren't going to /dev/null on the remote server and they just count the mails received.

For all we know it could have been a research to figure out on how easy is it to introduce a change like that and how much time such a redirection can be gone unnoticed.

It is just a piece of code in a random library available to download and used by persons actually willing and deciding to use it. The code was free to read before and after downloading it. No intrusion has been done on a remote machine, not even a phishing email have been sent.
by grumbel | 2025-09-28 14:30:19+00:00
The most annoying part is that the type checking exists outside the regular runtime. I constantly run into situation where the type checker is happy, but the thing explodes at runtime or the type checker keeps complaining about working code. And different type checkers will even complain about different things regularly too. It's a whole lot of work making every part of the system happy and the result still feels extremely brittle.
by david422 | 2025-09-28 14:30:20+00:00
I used python on a large code base for quite a while. Many team members did not like type hints, and a codebase that doesn't maintain type hints makes it harder to use them.

However, if I had a choice, rather than use typehints in python, I would much rather just use a statically typed language. Short, tiny scripts in python? Sure. Anything that grows or lives a long time? Use something where the compiler helps you out.
by easyThrowaway | 2025-09-28 14:31:20+00:00
But she worked as bartender[1] - which is one of those jobs that teaches you how "Fuck Around, Find Out" works in real life, very quickly. Again, it's not matter of social or economic status, but coming to understand extremely diverse social dynamics outside of the academic field.

Both her and the dock workers were pretty effective in their causes because they have experienced first-hand how going for an half-assed or whimsical approach even in everyday politics bites you hard.

[1]Also wikipedia says that her mother was a house cleaner and school bus driver?
by ricardobeat | 2025-09-28 14:31:41+00:00
> these things are designed for pure consumption

This is an old trope that needs to die. I used to play synths on a 1st gen iPad back in 2010, it had amazing <5ms latency at a time when you'd struggle to hit that on a PC using external hardware.

Wired headphones have always been around, even now all it takes is a $5 adapter. Bluetooth "aptX Low Latency" has also been around for years, though adoption has been a bit slow. It is quite standard on Android phones. On the Apple side, Airpods have had decent ~100ms latency for a few years (enough for casual gaming), and more recently have a custom wireless, low-latency lossless connection (Apple Vision only atm), and <20ms latency on the new iPhone 17 using Bluetooth 6.

It really is a wireless technology problem. Bluetooth LE audio only came around 2020, and barely adopted. Bluetooth 6 was announced late last year and just starting to show up in devices now.
by amluto | 2025-09-28 14:32:15+00:00
How about using a metal axle that penetrates the cage using an intentionally conductive bearing, i.e. a slip ring? It would need very low RF impedance, but it would only need to last for the expected lifespan of the drone.

At just a few GHz, metal mesh ought to be adequate for the cage material, so cooling isn’t necessarily a huge problem.
by marcosdumay | 2025-09-28 14:32:17+00:00
Nah, that part is ok. Human wherever you set it, human competence takes decades to really change, and those things have visible changes ever year or so.

The problem with all of the article's metrics is that they are all absolutely bullshit. It just throws claims like that AI can write full programs 50% of the time by itself in there and moves on like if it had any resemblance to what happens on the real world.
by samplifier | 2025-09-28 14:32:45+00:00
I'm a recovering completionist. Don't do this to me! I've been trying to find a secret area by walking on the pipes but that is probably a red herring. But why is there a gauge there? I also haven't found the girl on the roof yet, multi-wall jumping doesn't seem to work :)

SPOILERS AHEAD (for another game, which you should have played by now, if you enjoy this game, in my opinion) There's also a hiss at the industrial site which reminds me of the game Full Throttle where you have to kick the wall at the right time. But that can't be a thing, right? But the gauge!
by somenameforme | 2025-09-28 14:33:15+00:00
Opening knowledge in chess is almost entirely unnecessary below a rather high level, perhaps 2200+.

The reason less experienced players get obsessed with openings is because they make regular tactical mistakes in the opening, and then blame lack of opening knowledge, as opposed to their lack of tactical ability. In other words they try to memorize their way out of tactical mistakes, which is impossible. At that point, after it inevitably fails to work, they claim they've plateaued, lack the IQ, maybe the memory, maybe are too old, or whatever other excuse.

This is made even worse by the fact that opening knowledge is ostensibly easy to improve whereas tactical vision seems very difficult to improve. In reality it's the exact opposite. Exact opening lines will fade from your mind rapidly (though general ideas will stay with you forever - but that's another topic), whereas grinding tactics might not 'feel' like you've learned anything, but overtime will permanently train your intuition to where it needs to be to start seeing major gains.

On top of all of this - one could simply play 'freestyle' chess (the starting pieces locations are randomized) and suddenly there is 0 opening theory. But you'll find that your freestyle rating is going to be strongly proportional to your 'normal' chess rating!
by dragontamer | 2025-09-28 14:33:25+00:00
> No, it isn't. As a decent chess and go player I can tell you that they're both just tactics until you approach the master/dan level. And what is strategy if not just a longer form of tactical play?

You cannot tenuki in Chess.

In Go, especially at the 15kyu to 10kyu double-digit dan level, the opponents are full of opening and middle-game mistakes. The best response is often to ignore your opponent and play the most powerful move elsewhere on the board.

Knowing when to tenuki (ie: ignore the last move, play elsewhere) is a HUGE point in Go strategy. Its exceptionally difficult to play sente / forcing moves. Playing a sente vs gote sequence is what separates the 1-dan (experts maybe 1800+ Elo equivalent players) from the rest of us mere mortals. But recgonizing that the last move was gote (non-forcing) is maybe a 10kyu / 1200-Elo kind of thing.

-------

Chess is almost all tactics. Go on the other hand, is Strategic, as the concept of sente/gote/tenuki allows you to validly ignore the opponent's plan and work out your own plan.

You still need a solid tactical basis in Go. You cannot just run away from the opponent forever. But you might be surprised at how "valid" tenuki moves are.

------

For me, the growth from 15kyu (maybe 1200 elo in Chess) to 9kyu was a strong focus on sente, gote, tenuki, strategy, joseki, direction of play, strong vs weak. All "strategic" play that often sacrifices local tactics for greater point gains elsewhere.

Indeed, "weak" play in Go (ex: a 2-point jump) is WEAKER in terms of tactics. You are explicitly making an area weaker and easier to kill in exchange for moving faster on the board. A 2-point jump will ALWAYS be the worse tactical choice than a 1-point jump or solid connection.

This isn't like in Chess where a sacrifice immediately becomes apparent either. It can take 50+ moves before a position is played out and the difference between strong-connected play vs a 2-point jump shows up.

In any case, even 20kyu beginners can improve their games if they play 2-point jumps (or other weak / loose patterns) appropriately. Yeah you need the basics of tactics there otherwise the 20kyu player just loses all their stones at all. But protecting your stones / strong play is actually very very weak and will trap you as a beginner. You MUST play faster (but weaker) connections if you want to break through double-digit-kyu. Players just get too strong by 9kyu or 8kyu to rely on tactics alone.
by ajross | 2025-09-28 14:33:47+00:00
> I'm sure people were saying that about commercial airline speeds in the 1970's too.

Or CPU frequencies in the 1990's. Also we spent quite a few decades at the end of the 19th century thinking that physics was finished.

I'm not sure that explaining it as an "S curve" is really the right metaphor either, though.

You get the "exponential" growth effect when there's a specific technology invented that "just needs to be applied", and the application tricks tend to fall out quickly. For sure generative AI is on that curve right now, with everyone big enough to afford a datacenter training models like there's no tomorrow and feeding a community of a million startups trying to deploy those models.

But nothing about this is modeled correctly as an "exponential", except in the somewhat trivial sense of "the community of innovators grows like a disease as everyone hops on board". Sure, the petri dish ends up saturated pretty quickly and growth levels off, but that's not really saying much about the problem.
by georgemcbay | 2025-09-28 14:33:49+00:00
> Can somebody explain the psychology behind these beliefs?

"Wind power is bad" because Trump doesn't like the way wind turbines looked near his golf course.

Yes, the actual reason is that dumb.

Trump is the world's biggest baby back bitch and is the greatest proof we will ever have that the idea that we live in anything remotely approximating a meritocracy is one of the greatest fictions ever told.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c15l3knp4xyo
by dahauns | 2025-09-28 14:33:50+00:00
>AirPods Pro streaming 5.1, you get a better surround sound and audio experience than 99.9% of speaker setups.

The audio experience itself, sure - "Want high-end audio without breaking the bank and remodeling your room? Get a pair of decent headphones." has been sound (heh) advice for decades.

The surround sound part, though? Eh, not quite yet. I mean, on paper, they have the ingredients - (personalized) HRTF and head tracking. But in practice I found even the personalized HRTF somewhat underwhelming, and knowing what's possible from the VR world the gap is still significant (IMO the Valve Index off-ear solution is still the pinnacle in immersive positional audio without surround speakers, even without personalization of the HRTF, I haven't really tested the AVP implementation yet, though) - which leads me to second, IMO even larger issue:

Extremely limited usage scenarios. For the living room, it's basically just supported Apps/content on AppleTV. Compared to the reality of a standard AVR (or even just Soundbar) plus surround speakers setup - take any multichannel input (LPCM, DD, DTS MA, Atmos you name it) and output surround sound - that's...just not a substitute. And that's not even getting into latency issues with gaming/interactivity (a general BT issue, though, at least it's slowly improving...).
by adrian_b | 2025-09-28 14:34:15+00:00
The current is what varies proportionally with the amount of light received.

The open-circuit voltage depends mostly on the structure of the solar cells and on the temperature. It has only a very weak (logarithmic) dependence on the amount of light received.

The voltage that you measure at the output depends on the open-circuit voltage, on the amount of light received and on the amount of current that you draw from the panel.

The maximum open circuit voltage for a solar cell is easy to estimate, because it happens at the minimum temperature for which it is designed and the maximum solar illumination. It can be exceeded only using a light concentrator that projects on the panel light collected from a much greater area.
by coldtea | 2025-09-28 14:34:25+00:00
>People notice that while AI can now write programs, design websites, etc, it still often makes mistakes or goes in a wrong direction, and then they somehow jump to the conclusion that AI will never be able to do these tasks at human levels, or will only have a minor impact. When just a few years ago, having AI do these things was complete science fiction!

Both things can be true, since they're orthogonal.

Having AI do these things was complete fiction 10 years ago. And after 5 years of LLM AI, people do start to see serious limits and stunted growth with the current LLM approaches, while also seeing that nobody has proposed another serious contended to that approach.

Similarly, going to the moon was science finction 100 years ago. And yet, we're now not only not in Mars, but 50+ years without a new moon manned landing. Same for airplanes. Science fiction in 1900. Mostly stale innovation wise for the last 30 years.

A lot of curves can fit an exponential line plot, without the progress going forward being exponential.

We would have 1 trillion transistor cpus following Moore's "exponential curve"
by derbOac | 2025-09-28 14:34:31+00:00
Aside from the S-versus-exp issue, this area is one of these things where there's a kind of disconnect between my personal professional experience with LLMs and the criteria measures he's talking about. LLMs to me have this kind of superficially impressive feel where it seems impressive in its capabilities, but where, when it fails, it fails dramatically, in a way humans never would, and it never gets anywhere near what's necessary to actually be helpful on finishing tasks, beyond being some kind of gestalt template or prototype.

I feel as if there needs to be a lot more scrutiny on the types of evaluation tasks being provided — whether they are actually representative of real-world demands, or if they are making them easy to look good, and also more focus on the types of failures. Looking through some of the evaluation tasks he links to I'm more familiar with, they seem kind of basic? So not achieving parity with human performance is more significant than it seems. I also wonder, in some kind of maxmin sense, whether we need to start focusing more on worst-case failure performance rather than best-case goal performance.

LLMs are really amazing in some sense, and maybe this essay makes some points that are important to keep in mind as possibilities, but my general impression after reading it is it's kind of missing the core substance of AI bubble claims at the moment.
by forgotoldacc | 2025-09-28 14:34:52+00:00
Yes, the fact Britain was brutal to the Irish is no secret.

But had Ireland not had a monoculture that all rotted away, things would've been less severe. And what you've said only further proves the point I was making: you should grow other crops so that you're not dependent on imports. Britain wouldn't let the Irish import food. It's not impossible for a situation to arise where a country doesn't let Britain import food. Growing alternative grains is the British looking at their own brutal history and learning from it.
by rogerrogerr | 2025-09-28 14:35:02+00:00
I’m much happier to pay the flat rate (we might be in the same state) on registration; the mechanism for enforcement already exists. I don’t want the state to grow a new facility to regulate how I use electricity - sounds like a permitting, inspection, and surveillance nightmare.

I bet the cost to permit and install a whole different metering system would be several multiples of $150.
by ab5tract | 2025-09-28 14:35:47+00:00
Again, all of this comes from Ted Nelson. He also had philosophical antecedents, but in terms of software it was his dream of Xanadu that was the first hypertext system.

However, it’s worth pointing out that every attempt at Xanadu (under the name Xanadu) thus far has also turned out to be a fractional implementation of Nelson’s dream.
by bartread | 2025-09-28 14:36:02+00:00
This is beautiful, and works well on mobile in many ways.

I’m not unfortunately a fan of the way the touch controls work. Given the player is on a tiny spherical world I’d expected to be able to drag the world around under their feet to make them walk/run, whereas the way it works at the moment, on a smallish phone screen, feels somewhat backwards.