MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by potamic | 2025-09-16 08:10:52+00:00
It may be effective by sheer force of adoption, but it's not well designed at all. It has never been through all its iterations, with each one imposing a new programming model on its users and I predict what we have today will not be the last!

It started simple and sound idea but had its quirkiness with shouldUpdate, didReceive, willUnmount. But that wasn't enough, to write decent applications, you need to do unidirectional flow. You can do that, all you need is actions, action creators and dispatchers! Now you have all this bloat that eventually leads to reflux. While you're tearing your head screaming "What the flux", redux comes along and says hey you know what, if you just write a giant switch statement, you don't need dispatchers. And everybody liked not having to read about dispatchers, so redux was here to say. If it gave more problems you can just create a toolkit around it. Besides, it claimed to be functional. Surely that means it works, right? Now you could rub shoulders with those cool clojure kids who seem to be getting all those high paying jobs. But the cool clojure kids are not impressed. They say, class is something you are, not something you write. So you hang your head in shame and promise to never write classes again. While you're untangling yourself from this mixin mess you got mixed up with, an epiphany hits you. If you can emulate a class using functions, then you don't have to write classes again! And so you finally get around to ridding yourself of classes. Sure it means you have to write more functions, and nested functions and wrap all your functions and shove the state away somewhere you can't see, but it makes everything functional, which means it works. Except for handling exceptions globally, you'll need to use classes for that. And by the way, don't worry about unidirectionality. Everything is asynchronous now.
by Xss3 | 2025-09-16 08:12:15+00:00
I despised apples app model as soon as i tried to develop an app (game) and discovered they literally priced my broke college ass out of the market by forcing me to use their hardware, software, and most egregiously pay a 100usd fee to even get started. Not to submit the app to them, but just to start developing it. That DX is so awful i vowed never to release a single thing on their platform. The game was already built and doing well on androids store.
by mihaaly | 2025-09-16 08:12:20+00:00
Jesus Christ!

Who are the product designers of the present with these single-minded attitude not checking how the implementation affects the life of paying customers< Children?! Most take pride - on paper! - about what one can do 'so easily' with their product, just to raise barricades getting there, using it, or those pop up suddenly while using it, bumping into it like into a bollard ona highway. Or just chain them to it against will! I am not aiming at Android only here as this is a generic attitude I found from organization being so self obsessed about what THEY want that no-one else benefits, no-one else have real benefits - only mixed ones with sizeable drawbacks -, defying the purpose of having modern technology. When the life becomes differently complicated, then that is no progress at all, just messing around. I am thinking three, four, or more times nowadays buying any technology, which is sad, as I was so enthusiastic only one but especially two decades ago, discovering advances and gadgets. Not anymore. I spend my money - and TIME! - on things bringing benefit or joy instead, or on those I am FORCED into. Yes, this obsession of providing non-technology services (banking, bureaucracy, identification, ...) apps first (sometimes only, at least to various, sometimes important details of the use/access) which is a hugely demanding matter on users (choose, purchase, pay, setup, learn, re-learn, update, maintain, subscribe, know and accept terms, charge, protect, both physically and data wise, click away suggestions and self promotions while busy with something important) that it is a very bitter pill to swallow.
by 8cvor6j844qw_d6 | 2025-09-16 08:12:21+00:00
It's likely due to Firefox Relay being available at limited regions [1].

Here's what I see [2].

[1]: https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/which-countries-firefox...

[2]: https://postimg.cc/q6H9nDQf
by resonious | 2025-09-16 08:13:38+00:00
This hits home for me too. Claude feels like it has gotten more "yes-man"-y. I can no longer trust its judgement. Even if I come in with something dead wrong, I'm "absolutely right" and it finds amazing ways to spin my BS into something vaguely believable.

I am also bullying Claude more nowadays. Seeing this thread, I might give Codex another go (I was on Codex CLI before Claude Code. At that time, Claude blew Codex out of the water but something's changed)
by cesaref | 2025-09-16 08:14:26+00:00
Back in the 80s, as the home computer revolution got going, computers were typically wired up to small, cheap, portable TVs as a display device. These TVs used shadow masks, and the computer video output was typically modulated to a TV signal, and the TV was 'tuned' to the computer. All of this added large amounts of blur and distortion even before the signal was displayed on the TV.

By the mid 80s, it was maybe more typical to buy a dedicated CRT monitor, and the computer connected via composite, or maybe even an RGB feed to the monitor, allowing higher resolution and much improved quality.

For the well healed, this route also led to the holy grail, a trinitron tube!

At each of these changes, the aesthetic of the display technology changed, but probably the best memories come from the original blurry stuff as the magical moment of actually getting something out of a home computer.
by unscaled | 2025-09-16 08:14:27+00:00
This heavyweight syntax has nothing do with OOP. No common definition of OOP (before Java came into existence) said that functions cannot exist outside of a class.

Java choose to adopt object oriented purity in a very weird way. Sun has initially rejected the idea of standalone functions (static import was introduced in Java 5, closures in Java 8 and compact source files/instance main is only coming now). Even with static imports and compact source files, there is still a class holding these methods behind the scenes (for practical and compatibility reasons, more than to achieve any ideological or theoretical goals at this point). That seems like Sun was trying to keep the purity of "everything is an object", but at the same time they've introduced primitive values, which are clearly not objects. This was a pretty bad decision in my opinion. There is no practical benefit from requiring every function to be defined inside a class[1]. On the other hand, being able to have methods defined on an integer is a pretty nice feature.

If we look at a Smalltalk, which is generally considered be an example of a "pure" OOP language, we see a striking difference. This is Hello World in Smalltalk:

'Hello, world!' printNl

Smalltalk allows you to freely define functions outside of classes and even write code that is not part of a class (directly in the REPL).

[1] https://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2006/03/execution-in-kingdo...
by jbreckmckye | 2025-09-16 08:14:40+00:00
> So JSX is pure Javascript and not, say, a dialect of XML embedded in JS?

It would be best to think of it as syntax sugar for create Element() function calls. You enter JSX with angle tags and insert expressions in braces

> React is full of magic syntax that looks like functions, but e.g. you can't call them inside an if statement, or you have to redundantly declare the 'dependencies' (variables you read) and so on

That's not magic syntax. That's just functions that must be processed in regular order between render ticks.

It's not a difficult exercise to write a "plain JS" function that works that way. If you've worked much with closures you can visualise how that would play out.
by oneeyedpigeon | 2025-09-16 08:14:42+00:00
I was thinking about this exact kind of issue yesterday, while watching an interview with Jeremy Corbyn, a British politician who has formed a new party that is, provisionally, called "Your Party". The back-and-forth with the interviewer just highlighted how bad an idea this is, with one of them referring to "your party" and the other one also referring to "your party". In some contexts, it's absolutely fine. In others, it's a complete mockery.
by js8 | 2025-09-16 08:15:10+00:00
I dabbled in magic, and what I found beatiful about it is, as an audience, you're amazed once (because magician never does same trick twice). But as a performer, you're actually amazed three times!

First time as an audience, when someone shows you a performance of a trick. The second time you're amazed, when they show you the method, and you think - how could have I been fooled by this stupid detail? And the third time you're amazed, when you actually learn it, you perform it, of course imperfectly, and it still fools the other people.
by InMice | 2025-09-16 08:15:45+00:00
I read the article but feel I dont walk away with whats actually (supposed to be) wrong with ios 26 or tahoe, besides the apple watch has too many in your face features. As well -Steve jobs died almost 15 years ago now, yet everyone seems to know a reason why Apple has since disgraced what his vision was for Apple the next 15 years after he died? Like anyone really knows what Jobs would say today. - The new iphone iphone this year sucks it's not "revolutionary" this year. This complaint is standard every year.

The only thing I agree with is the disappointment they won't make an macbook air smaller than 13"
by postexitus | 2025-09-16 08:16:09+00:00
Arguably, they were wrong on all these points. Unix roots (text terminal) gave the one of the strongest boosts to Macbook sales in terms of newly minted developers. Deal with Microsoft brought not only much needed liquidity, but also Office, which was "the killer app(r)" for that era. Let me add one more - people complained about PowerPC->Intel switch, and then same people complained about Intel->Arm switch (both brave and visionary decisions which has been years in the making. The naysayers may complain about everything and nothing but Apple continues to prevail - I am saying that as no Apple fanboy - viva la Amiga!
by Lio | 2025-09-16 08:17:04+00:00
Yep I feel the same. To know if you're the target user or not I guess you go to Apple's marketing material.

Do you see anyone that looks like you, doing anything that looks like what you do? I don't and I can't remember the last time I did.

It seems to be a lifestyle brand now for people I have little in common with.

At least with Linux there's the possibility that you can make it your own even if it's not that way right now.
by austin-cheney | 2025-09-16 08:17:21+00:00
In a single word: conscientiousness.

Simplicity requires a deliberate planning consideration plus additional effort to maintain, often through refactoring once new requirements surface to implementation. For some people these additional steps are essential to main clear output and a single deliberate path forward. For other people these additional efforts are an impossible chore best offloaded to some third party.

These thoughts about simplicity apply not just to code but to every decision in everyday life.
by tayiorrobinson | 2025-09-16 08:17:41+00:00
> That's why there is such a thing as a React compiler - a good sign that you're not writing JS, which doesn't have compilers.

You say that like it's a bad thing - but it didn't stop Babel or TypeScript from being popular, both of which need a compiler. And being honest, I don't like extra tools in my chain, which is probably why I don't use React proper, but that proves you don't need anything React specific for anything other than optimisation

The only syntax you really want for React is JSX. Which is just because writing React.createElement("div" ...) every time is unergomomic. JSX isn't specific to React. It could easily be a language feature, in fact it is an OOTB language feature of TypeScript.

> React is full of magic syntax that looks like functions, but e.g. you can't call them inside an if statement

They look like function calls, because they are. They're not "magic syntax", and in fact, those rules are explicitly because theres no way around that without implementing special syntax
by mpweiher | 2025-09-16 08:18:25+00:00
Why do you lie so blatantly on something that is so easily checked and disproven?

Japan has restarted at least 14 reactors.

https://www.modernpowersystems.com/analysis/re-establishing-...

https://pris.iaea.org/pris/CountryStatistics/CountryDetails....

Or even just Wikipedia:

"As of January 2022 there are 33 operable reactors in Japan, of which 12 reactors are currently operating.[87] Additionally, 5 reactors have been approved for restart and further 8 have restart applications under review."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_Japan#Nuclear...

Your ourworldindata links says nothing about current investments. It is therefore not a repudiation of what I wrote about investments in nuclear and renewables.

Here's what ChatGPT says:

Is the industrialized world massively investing in both nuclear energy and renewables?

ChatGPT said:

Yes — there is strong evidence that in many (though not all) of the industrialized world, there is a massive investment push in both renewables (especially solar and wind) and nuclear, though the balance, pace, and scale differ a lot by region. Below are key takeaways, some of the caveats, and what seems likely going forward.

Nuclear energy

Interest in building new nuclear capacity has increased. Many countries are extending the life of existing reactors, and new reactors are under construction. For example: 63 nuclear reactors globally are under construction as of 2025, representing over 70 GW of capacity.

Annual investment in nuclear (both in building new reactors and extending existing ones) has risen by almost 50% since 2020, now exceeding USD 60 billion per year. (IEA)

Some countries are making major new commitments: UK’s investment in the Sizewell C plant, public & private funds for modular reactors, Canadian incentives for SMRs, etc.

Research indicates that global nuclear capacity might more than double by 2050 (from ~398 GW now to ~860 GW).
by javcasas | 2025-09-16 08:19:23+00:00
Angular: Where is the code for the <foo/> component that is used here? Anywhere in the codebase, maybe defined multiple times, depending on module configuration one or another may be used. Good luck finding which one.

React: Where is the code for the <Foo/> component that is used here? Either defined in the same file or imported, like any other javascript thing.

But React is the crazy one.
by sensanaty | 2025-09-16 08:20:08+00:00
> Ecosystem Fit: React has the more full and stable ecosystem, you choose React

People always say this, but in my experience especially with modern day tooling, all the frameworks basically have the same tooling support. I mean take a look at something like the Tanstack libraries, they have support for literally every single framework out there, even some small obscure ones I've never heard of. I know there exist some big ones like Three.js wrappers and animation libraries, and especially React-specific component libraries, but really what tooling do most people miss that isn't available in Vue or Svelte but is in React exclusively? Even things like Three Fiber (for three.js) has Vue/Svelte equivalents these days.

I've been working with Vue for a long time, and at some big companies with BIG projects too, and I've literally never come across a situation where I saw a React library that didn't exist in Vue.

Hell, I'll even go controversial here and say Vue's ecosystem is better, because of the Vue Core team's decision to create Vue Router, VueX/Pinia and VueUse. These 3 things here - routing, state management and commonly reused helper/util functions - are the bane of my existence in any React codebase I've ever interacted with because there's 11 different state management tools and paradigms you have to choose from, so every single React codebase will be different from the other ones in some subtle and annoying ways. Some codebases even have multiple state management tools! With Vue, you can sort of shoot yourself in the foot if you try really hard to do so, but for the most part the large majority of projects out there stay with the idiomatic way of doing things and you don't even ever have to consider doing anything else, because the defaults just work (TM).
by dariosalvi78 | 2025-09-16 08:21:20+00:00
well, the statare would probably disagree with your statement (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statare). It's true that in Sweden most peasants were, at least on paper, more free than in other places, but their conditions were no fun either.

I think that trust in government comes from a mix of things, oppression was probably not a necessity, and centralised control was beneficial to most classes, but I see that there is also a very strong cultural element. Trust in authorities is taught in schools in very early ages, I see this with my children and I can compare to other systems (contrary to most Swedes). The folkhemmet ideology is still very strong in this country, it's almost a matter of national pride. To this add the tendency to conformism (jantelagen) and the avoidance of conflicts at all costs, which makes criticising others very badly seen.

Regardless where it comes from, I find that the uncritic, often blind trust in authorities in Sweden problematic because it hinders plurality and a sane discussion in society, like in the case of the Chatcontrol law. But individualism is also on the rise, very much so in fact, and the society is changing fast, and with it also trust.
by mike_hearn | 2025-09-16 08:22:00+00:00
Are you talking about Codex CLI or their GitHub integration?

GPT-5 is a great model. I tried Codex CLI Rust, as they seem to be deprecating the JS version, and it is awful. I don't know what possessed them to try and write a TUI in Rust but it isn't working. The Claude Code UI is hugely superior.
by johnisgood | 2025-09-16 08:22:05+00:00
So a TL;DR of your comment is that you just have to learn / memorize to use things. That applies to everything, not just what you are discussing here.

If you only use 'cd', 'mv', 'rm', and 'ln', then really, there is not much to learn. Perhaps the '-rf' option to 'rm', which is how you delete directories (that are not empty). You complained about the naming, but 'mv' requires fewer keystrokes than 'move', and once you know that 'mv' = move, 'rm' = remove, and so on, then what is the issue? It makes sense. DOS had just as "arbitrary" names: 'del' instead of 'rm', for example. The UNIX versions are deliberately short for efficiency, and once you learn them, they are universal.

Man pages are fine. Just press '/' to search by string or regex, and 'n' for next match. They are also consistent: if you want a particular section, you search for it. But it is important to remember that man pages are reference material, not tutorials. If you want quick examples, try https://tldr.sh, https://cheat.sh, or another alternative.

If this is difficult, or you simply do not want to learn it, that is fine: use what works for you. But if you are a programmer, you are going to be learning tools constantly, and the core UNIX utilities are among the simplest. Once learned, they do not change. Personally, I have not had to learn anything new about them since I was 13. I am 31 now. You learn once, and you use forever.

That said, there are real examples of arcane tools. 'ffmpeg' and 'rsync' have some of the most obscure command-line options I have ever seen, which is why I keep bash aliases and functions for the things I do often. That is how you make your life easier as a programmer: learn the fundamentals, then abstract the complexity where it makes sense.

TL;DR: Learning is not optional. Whether it is GNU/POSIX utilities, GUIs, wizards, or even LLMs, you still have to learn them. Man pages are reference material, not tutorials. Learn the basics once, and you are set for life.
by cleartext412 | 2025-09-16 08:22:29+00:00
> but what if it fails to start?

Since you're mentioning opening laptop's lid I assume you mean literally failing to start, as after power cycling. For that, wouldn't simple hitting the power button be enough? It certainly doesn't require keyboard. If you plan to place it somewhere not easily accessible, there is Wake on LAN, which most modern PC motherboards are going to support.

If some maintenance task cannot be done with ssh/tmux, you can always use remote desktop software, in local network even RDP will do. And if something went wrong enough for you to not be able to connect to the server remotely then there is indeed no way around bringing and connecting a spare keyboard and monitor, but events like that should be quite rare normally.
by FirmwareBurner | 2025-09-16 08:22:39+00:00
The UN is just a glorified board room for countries to discuss things, it has no executive powers over its permanent security council members and their allies.

Basically, the UN can declare whatever they want, but there's nothing stopping the likes of US and Russia to ignore it and do the opposite of that.

It's the League of Nations all over again. Nothing has been learned.
by zelphirkalt | 2025-09-16 08:22:42+00:00
Don't forget about the privacy cost associated with the canvas. If this ever becomes widespread, we will have many many sites extract browser fingerprinting information from the canvas. It would then move the game one more step towards dystopia, where we have to analyze and block certain ways of code interacting with the canvas and it might even prove impossible. And then incapable web devs will offer you no solution but canvas buttons for the login to your bank account. No, I don't think this is the way forward.
by theshrike79 | 2025-09-16 08:24:29+00:00
The laws for this were written when "public photography" was someone with a film camera. It was maybe valid in the digital camera era.

But now I can point a camera at a crowd and It will:

- count the number of people and animals there - give me an estimated gender for each - analyse the sentiment of each person - save their facial features so I can find "Male-sg76fg" in future photos automatically - store the GPS location

All this with consumer gear I can carry with me, no government level spy gadgets needed. All live at 2-20fps depending on how much hardware I throw at it.

With some extra work I can then find each of them on social media, grab their real names and other information from public sources and now I have a surveillance database. (Illegal where I live, but who's gonna check?)

This makes "public photography" a whole different thing from what it used to be.
by WickyNilliams | 2025-09-16 08:25:07+00:00
Hooks are very much not normal functions though. They are a new "colour" of function much like async functions - they can only be called in components or other hooks, they cannot be called conditionally, cannot be called in loops etc. The so-called "rules of hooks"

(To get ahead of the common objection: of course it's still JavaScript by virtue of being implemented in JavaScript. But so are Svelte, Vue et all)
by lucas_membrane | 2025-09-16 08:25:33+00:00
I've been using the free VSCode editor on linux, and it has recently started hinting that I ought to install some version of Copilot. I'm an old retired guy who just programs hobby stuff for myself, and I try to separate my leisure activities from the world of sordid materialism. I would rather not deal with AI, as I use my computing projects to track the normal decline of my mental abilities now in progress. I reason that Microsoft, or its github arm, wants to find some way to turn me into a revenue source by either requiring me to use something like that and then making it cost something, or requiring me to use something like that and then making me give them more information about myself in order to use it. How long until that happens?