MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by asciimov | 2025-09-15 08:38:34+00:00
I’m really surprised at the numerous comments here admonishing the use of box mix. For most Americans, we don’t do enough baking to warrant having flour and leaveners on hand. It’s just cheaper and more efficient to buy the box mix under $2 and use it when you need it. Besides, the end result for the average person is going to be better than anything they try to scratch make.
by beAbU | 2025-09-15 08:39:41+00:00
I'm not sure what it's like on iOS, but on Android the latency renders attempting anything "serious" impossible. There is a noticeable delay between pressing an on-screen key and getting sound out. I don't even want to imagine what a Bluetooth keybed introduce in the latency chain!

Do iDevices not support hardware (USB) MIDI?
by phkamp | 2025-09-15 08:41:23+00:00
Danish dude here.

We had a number of cases in Denmark over the recent years which pushes this agenda:

In addition to the obvious child abuse, there have been a case where video of a high-school girls private sexual activities where spread wildly on asocial media, fake-porn of various public figures and several cases of organized crime using various end-to-end encrypted services.

None of the Danish politicians I have communicated with like the ChatControl proposal very much, but there is nothing else on the table, which isn't much worse in terms of privacy invasion, so their only choice is ChatControl or doing nothing.

My personal opinion:

No human right is absolute, not even the right to life itself.

The demands of upholding the civilized society limit all human rights, and this limitation has always included intrusions of privacy in order to solve crimes.

I far prefer Dan Geer's proposal (See his black-hat keynote):

Companies on the Internet get to choose one of these two business models:

A) Common-carrier. Handles all content as opaque data, makes no decisions about what users see. No responsibility for the legality of the content. (= how telephone companies and postal carriers are regulated)

B) Information provider: 100% responsible for all content, no matter where they got it from. (= how newspapers are regulated)

The current "the algorithm did it" excuse for making illegal material go viral, to maximize profits, is incompatible with a civilized society.

I've asked the politicians whey they do not do that and the answers is "We do not want to piss off USA", in recent months that concern seems to be fading.
by Joel_Mckay | 2025-09-15 08:41:49+00:00
In general, your notions of front-line combat strategy is wrong.

People on both sides used the fiber-optic platforms to target the RF Jammers/platforms first, and then deploy normal FPV platforms to chase down the soldiers.

Note, one may buy a fiber network link kit for drones for around $650 USD off China online stores. Try to be more precise if you don't know something. =3
by AlecSchueler | 2025-09-15 08:42:13+00:00
And even then it was based on a misunderstanding of border policy, a false perception of control by the EU. In the years since Brexit all of the issues they had have only worsened and the biggest political agitator now is just the same group that pushed for Brexit with a new name still running on an anti immigrant ticket. Turns out the border problems were policies of their own governments.
by gingerBill | 2025-09-15 08:42:24+00:00
Oberon is a general-purpose programming language, not a DSL. Even though it is very minimal, you can still do quite a bit in it.

But the point of teaching compiler development is to teach people how to do the basic things from tokenizing, parsing, semantic checking, and code generation (directly to machine code).

I have found this is actually a skill most programmers don't even know how to do, especially just tokenizing and parsing, so I thought I'd use Oberon-07 as a base/inspiration for it.

n.b. at the time of this comment, the repo/project is not even 24 hours old yet.
by TonyPeakman | 2025-09-15 08:42:27+00:00
That’s a good comparison — Svelte also started from the “write less, ship less” idea, and I have a lot of respect for it.

The big difference is that Svelte achieves that by compiling away the framework, whereas Dagger.js avoids compilation entirely. You don’t install a CLI, you don’t run a build — you literally drop a <script> from a CDN and wire up directives in plain HTML. It’s closer to Alpine/htmx in that sense, but with a focus on working alongside Web Components.

So in spirit, yes — both try to reduce overhead. Svelte optimizes post-build output; Dagger.js tries to remove the build step altogether.

Here is a dagger.js version Hello world demo：https://codepen.io/dagger8224/pen/raOXxee?editors=1010
by sanitycheck | 2025-09-15 08:42:28+00:00
Not sure I agree with 3.

I can have Claude write stuff that does basically the right thing and actually works but, as so many people say, it's like working with a junior dev. The only way I'm going to get code I'd want to present as my own is by sitting looking over their shoulder and telling them what to do constantly, and with a junior dev and with Claude (etc) that takes longer than just writing it myself.

AI-coded/assisted work should be flagged as such so everyone knows that it needs extra scrutiny. If we decided to let a horde of junior devs loose on a codebase we'd naturally pay more attention to PRs from new intern Jimmy than revered greybeard Bob and we shouldn't let Claude hide behind Bob's username.
by sa46 | 2025-09-15 08:42:37+00:00
> Page Object Models trade off clarity for encapsulation [and] obscure what's actually happening.

This argument also applies to using a function for abstraction.

I've just written a few dozen e2e tests with Playwright. The code looks like:

await invoiceDetailPage.selectCustomer(page, 'Acme'); await invoiceDetailPage.selectCustomerPoNumber(page, '1234567890'); await invoiceDetailPage.setCustomerReleaseNumber(page, '987654321'); ...10-15 more lines

Each of those lines is 3 to 20 lines of Playwright code. Aggressive DRY is bad, but Page Object Models are usually worth it to reduce duplication and limit churn from UI changes.
Show HN: A Vite and React starter kit for real-time chat with no back end
by adrai | 2025-09-15 08:42:47+00:00
Hi HN, I built this because I think adding real-time features like chat should be much easier for frontend developers. This is a complete, multi-room chat app you can clone and have running in a couple of minutes. It's powered by a serverless tool I'm creating called Vaultrice. Looking for feedback on the DX and the overall concept. Thanks!
by DemocracyFTW2 | 2025-09-15 08:43:04+00:00
Another day has come around here since, I've slept over this argument, and I still find it genuinely anti-scientific and smug. As for the coals to Newcastle, did you know that there are steam engines that want to be fed particular types of coal, not any type, to run well (I think I learned that from YouTuber Cruise the Cut)? So there's a point to made that sometimes bringing coals to Newcastle is exactly what you want. Other than that we need much more research in all kinds of cyclic processes that we can utilize to make our activities more sustainable. Right now much too much material is on a one-way trip to the landfill or the incinerator, and how to continue mining and farming is solely left as an exercise to the future reader, with no hind- or foresight, at all. Traditionally people used all kinds of wrappings and containers, many of them suboptimal from a modern POV which we now have replaced with all kinds of plastic which is littering the planet, land and water alike. A solution will not be simple or easy, but if cellulose from grapevine can be part of it, that's probably a good thing.
by lelanthran | 2025-09-15 08:43:37+00:00
> Ah, so this is really just another way poverty is punished. I

Yes, but it's not intentional like you seem to imply, it's incidental.

The intention is not to punish those with no money, its to extract the most value in every segment of the market.

Trust me, maximal value extraction is similarly going on for new cars and lightly-used second hand cars too.
by justinyee17 | 2025-09-15 08:44:09+00:00
To share my perspective: I don't believe working on what interests you most at the time is necessarily counterproductive. But like many things, it depends.

Likewise, when the road ahead remains hazy or I'm stuck on a problem with my projects, I often work on another one where I have a clearer vision of how to progress.

Eventually, motivation rekindles with new insight into the prior one(s). Maybe a collaborator finally reviewed my code and gave their input. Perhaps I discovered a new organizational pattern. Or maybe I just played a video game and noticed some cool UI mechanics to copy.

Sometimes in a week, sometimes months. Sometimes, even a failed idea from years ago reincarnates in another form. The desire and ability to work on the project eventually return - even if it's another temporary burst. Often, the source of inspiration comes from places I never could've imagined.

I take blocked progress as a sign of missing prerequisites or the timing being off. Therefore, your project will move to the next level when it does - only when it's ready to, and always at the right time.

I also think new projects give this dopamine hit because everything's novel. Building from scratch leads to large, visible progress. The ideal vision is fresh in one's mind.

But with time, it becomes a slow iterative crawl. New issues arise that I hadn't considered. All the fun stuff is already done, and the boring remains. The results aren't always as expected - perhaps I discover the entire premise is broken.

Admittedly, 20 projects sounds like a lot. I'm at about 5 projects occupying my mental / thought space, 2 that I've actually developed recently, and I feel that's already pretty heavy for me.

I'd say the determining factor of whether frequent change-ups is a problem would be your intrinsic reasons for switching.

Can you make progress, but don't want to work on it, or is confidence waning in the concept entirely? Or do you feel there's just more progress to be made in the new? Is there still a desire to return to the old?

If the latter, I'd say it's only a matter of time before you have 20 well-developed projects. There's no deadline, after all. Each can receive the time it needs to thrive.

If the former, though, there may be fundamental issues with the premise - but that's just a step toward the next big discovery.

Additional questions: When would you consider a project complete, if ever? Is there any overlap between them? Would you be comfortable sharing more details?
by indigo945 | 2025-09-15 08:45:42+00:00
The "How it works under the hood" section raises more question than it answers. What is the difference between step 3 and step 4? As described, step 3 goes from LLVM IR to BPF (via llc), and step 4 - goes from LLVM IR to eBPF bytecode? That's nonsensical.
by froh | 2025-09-15 08:45:43+00:00
RWE is not the oil or coal lobby. they pay for coal and gas. never would they ever finance a nuclear power plant. to them .02€/kWh (wind/solar) is _super_ sexy/profitable.

the fossil fuel lobby is in Texas, Middle East, Russia,and likewise uranium. add Siemens and their nuclear shares in other companies, for the plants.

RWE does not manufacture plants or dig coal.
by GregarianChild | 2025-09-15 08:47:16+00:00
> definition of the word neuromorphic

The definition of the term is so vague as to be useless for scientific progress. What exactly is excluded by "brain inspired"? If I paint my computer grey because the brain is grey, it's brain inspired? You know that regular expressions were invented to model neurons [1]? If nothing is excluded the term is useless. But in reality, the term is used explicitly to deceive as already done in the 19th century see [2].

Heraclitus says somewhere something to the effect that "good thinking is dry". Established terminology like

• Asynchronous CPU

• Delay Insensitive Circuit

• Quasi-Delay-Insensitive Circuit

• Clockless CPU

• Asynchronous circuit

• Self-timed circuit

is dry and useful. 'Neuromorphic' suggests an understanding of how the brain works that is just not there in 2025.

> Do we know that neurons operate asynchronously to each other, only activating when their inputs change? Yes.

I strongly disagree.

We do not know how exactly the brain codes information. If you have timed coding, it's not asynchronous. And that doesn't even address the chemical signals that abound in the brain. The Hodgkin-Huxley equations give a good approximation to how the neuron produces a "spike" - the signal that travels down the axon. But it's only an approximation. Every type of ion channel in the cell adds another 10 or so unkown parameters to the equations, which can only be approximately found experimentally. So we have a fairly good picture of how a single neuron behaves in most circumstances, but not complete. Ion channels are are crucial to how the brain works. They are the nonlinearity that makes computation possible, like the transistor is to the computer. There are several hundred types of ion channel that are known about so far and probably thousands more that are not yet discovered.

> That's a silly question

Not in the context I asked: I asked him after he had suggested that 'neuromorphic' would be great to reduce the energy consumption of LLMs. I wanted to know why/how, given that LLMs are trained today with BP. I give him the benefit of the doubt here, since we were in a rush and could not go deeper into the subject.

> mix spiking neural nets and backprop ?!

It's an active area of research to do just this. Google SpikeProp, e.g. [3]. Lot's of papers in this space at the moment. Why? I don't know as I don't follow this space. Potential reasons: (i) BP is natural, (ii) BP works super well for DeepLearning, (iii) the 'neuromorphic' community has failed so spectacular and want to try something that works, (iv) to get funding, (v) we really do not know how the brain works, and in that case, why not try out crazy things?

[1] S. Kleene, Representation of events in nerve nets and finite automata. https://www.dlsi.ua.es/~mlf/nnafmc/papers/kleene56representa....

[2] K. S. Kendler, A history of metaphorical brain talk in psychiatry. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41380-025-03053-6

[3] https://homepages.cwi.nl/~sbohte/publication/esann.pdf
by Nevermark | 2025-09-15 08:47:22+00:00
Completely agree that the biggest benefit from most texts is absorbing new ways to think, and developing familiarity with subjects and ideas.

Most individual facts will evaporate, but it’s likely if I need them in the future I will rember where to look.

> I remember co-workers highlighting large chunks of text, sometimes 40%.

Only quibble, is nobody underlines things they plan on remembering.

It’s a tool for focusing the mind.

In rare, very rare occasions I have benefited as well from being able to review a book in record time since the points my brain works from are all underlined and page corners bent.

That might be one out of a thousand books.

Mostly, creating a physical act, to accompany the mental act, of identifying key points, is the point.

I don’t just underline, but mark things with stars, exclamation points, happy faces, etc. in the margins. Institutionalizes paying attention, lets my hands move so my body doesn’t think I am supposed to be taking a nap, and creates regular but very micro-pauses where I process the words I am decorating.
by gpjanik | 2025-09-15 08:47:25+00:00
Language models don't "pack concepts" into the C dimension of one layer (I guess that's where the 12k number came from), neither do they have to be orthogonal to be viewed as distinct or separate. LLMs generally aren't trained to make distinct concepts far apart in the vector space either. The whole point of dense representations, is that there's no clear separation between which concept lives where. People train sparse autoencoders to work out which neurons fire based on the topics involved. Neuronpedia demonstrates it very nicely: https://www.neuronpedia.org/.
by sunshine-o | 2025-09-15 08:49:00+00:00
Omarchy and CachyOS are very interesting but they do not look serious about security [0] [1].

I mean in this day and age we all agree you need disk encryption (for a least 20 years) but what about SELinux, application sandboxing for example?

Especially for a desktop OS like Omarchy shipped with a bunch of apps and "plugins".

This has been a Linux Desktop weakness for more than a decade (compared to macOS, Windows and Android). App sandboxing is a bit sketchy and hard to get right.

The fact they do not explicitly state their strategy regarding those things make me believe this is a bit amateurish.

- [0] https://wiki.cachyos.org/cachyos_basic/faq/#security--best-p...

- [1] https://learn.omacom.io/2/the-omarchy-manual/93/security
by mettamage | 2025-09-15 08:50:03+00:00
Haha, this is my dad too. He doesn’t seem to realize it. It’s me as well. These are stories that tend to strongly relate to our identity. Like, if you get to know me I will talk about meditation or another story like me training with Wim Hof for an experiment at the Radboud Universiteit.

My username checks out :P

We relate to our own stories I guess.
by TonyPeakman | 2025-09-15 08:50:09+00:00
Thanks for your comment. — typed JSX ergonomics are really nice, and most compile-time frameworks today make you choose between that and some sort of template DSL. However, dagger.js takes a different angle: it doesn’t try to be “React-like compiled,” it tries to be no-compile at all. State is just plain JS, DOM transforms happen directly via attributes (+click, +load, etc.), and everything is HTML you can literally view-source. So it’s not competing with React/Svelte on compile sophistication — it’s aiming to be the lightweight “glue” around whatever components you like, while keeping the HTML open and approachable.

I really hope you will try using dagger.js and come back to tell me how you feel about it. Thanks!
by BrandoElFollito | 2025-09-15 08:50:12+00:00
Same here (I am French, so the language is yet another barrier). I thought this was about viral actions by extreme ecologists that get into butchering companies and expose how the animals suffer.

And I thought - "these are scams?" But hey, everything is possible.

And then got to the comments and learned a few things :) The article is very good and the comments as well.
by gtsop | 2025-09-15 08:50:44+00:00
I know the whole story in depth and you keep iterating over the same thing.

If this person has indeed mental issues, to publicly expose it in a degrading light does not help him, or anyone else really.

If he doesn't have mental issues then all this discussion is unjustly defaming a person and damaging perception around mental issues.

Either way this discussion is bad.

You are the one portraying the project as unreliable. I only judge GrapheneOS by the actual output being delivered, the code and and the binary that is. And if you go down the route of validating the output based on his behaviour then i would flip it on you. I would much rather use an OS developed by a paranoid guy who thinks everyone hunts them. I'd bet it's more secure.

But this is silly-talk. What matters is the deliverable. Has the project given any evidence of being unreliable or not teustworthy?
by beeflet | 2025-09-15 08:51:00+00:00
I take the opposite perspective on everything you've said.

Is it really that sad of a death? Many people die every day, and a few of them happen to have a ton of cameras shoved in their face. Why should anyone care about some minor celebrity?

I don't know what all this mourning is about, but it seems fake to me. The real reason why people should be upset is that it sets a precedent for political violence, so why not be upfront about it?

>It made me think about the famous part in The Twits (how if you say nasty stuff, you become ugly).

Ugly people are ugly, and nasty people are nasty. Don't get it twisted, real life is not a fairy tale. The cause and effect is reversed.

> AFAIK It's not true, but it's such a wonderful analogy. Kirk was an inflammatory figure, and spent a great deal of time talking about negative things. This was, essentially, a big part of what he did for a living - he talked about really sad things to win debates.

I don't know, it seems like he pretty much just rattled off standard talking points from the conservative playbook. My perspective is the opposite, the takeaway is that he wasn't that controversial or meaningful or deeply effective.

The tragedy is not that his life's work was cut short, it's just that his life's work was not that important in the first place. It's inevitable that we all kick the bucket one day, what matters is how we spend our time.

That's also what makes the killing so strange to me. He was a rather inconsequential figure, so the idea that someone would be driven to madness over him is pretty unusual and speaks to some sickness.

>Less that it makes you ugly, and more that a tragedy can seem, after the fact, strangely coherent for people who make their lives around tragic things.

People are cheering or mourning because they want to see "their side" win regardless of the principles or civility. It's not that complicated.
by amszmidt | 2025-09-15 08:52:01+00:00
> If Stallman had started with a kernel, there would be very few people who had the legal right to run any utilities or apps on the new kernel

That is really not true, one of the most important things when it comes to the GNU project and the whole Free Software movement is the ability to run _any_ program, be it non-free software or free software. This has been parroted for more than 40 years now ...
by zubspace | 2025-09-15 08:52:15+00:00
Maybe I'm missinformed, but doesn't starlink have to comply with rules made by local authorities? Afaik, when the internet goes down, like it happened in Thailand, Starlink can't be used too, because it always roots traffic to a ground station near the source.

If this would not happen, I would agree that Starlink is the future. But as it is right now, I don't see the point, unless you are living in or travelling to remote places.
by isodev | 2025-09-15 08:52:44+00:00
> extremely niche

Personally, I feel we're slowly moving beyond the mindset that one tool or service needs to "rule them all". I was recently very pleased to discover several online events I took part in were powered by PeerTube, and it just worked.

If an organization is looking to host a stream or offer virtual attendance of sorts, it feels like a no-brainer to pick something like PeerTube and avoid the data/algorithm behemoths.
by spacechild1 | 2025-09-15 08:52:48+00:00
Good to know that you actually have kids yourself! That gives me some confidence that you are really trying to make this as safe and non-addictive as possible. Although it's not a product I would use (without supervision), I can see that you have good intentions.

> We've found it helps them feel they can learn as far as their curiosity takes them

Unless they have very specific questions, children encyclopedia books/apps already go a long way. I'm not sure it's really worth bringing in LLMs to achieve that last mile.

> For some reason, I don't see a lot of people criticizing that. Perhaps, because they don't market to kids. Kids just use it.

You are right. The broader issue is that so many parents allow their kids unsupervised access to the internet in the first place. I'm just wondering if these people really care enough to use your app instead...