MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by spwa4 | 2025-09-14 15:59:12+00:00
Not that your other claims aren't equally ridiculous, but sorry, no. Pretty much everything, in China or elsewhere, is worse than Gaza.

Gaza, claimed victims (hamas numbers, rounded up): 65'000 dead. (note that these numbers are ridiculous: for example, did you know, Israel did not kill a single hamas member? Zero. Not a single one)

Gaza, claimed victims, IDF numbers: 13'000 dead (a little under half claimed to be hamas members. >80% are fighting age men)

(and let's not forget the other difference: in the victims of Hamas, >85% are civilians. And that's assuming that everyone, on duty or on holiday, working even indirectly for the military counts as a soldier, including locksmiths and cleaning staff, otherwise it's easily over 90%)

So let's say it's somewhere between those two numbers. But every conflict in the area is bigger than the biggest numbers in Gaza, easily.

Syria, right next door, death toll: 656'000 dead.

Sudan, not that far from Gaza, with hamas' parent organisation the perpetrators: 300'000 dead.

Lebanon (note: conflict started by the PA, against Christians), death toll: at least 150'000 dead.

IS/Daesh (note: conflict started by Palestinians), death toll: 306'000.

Xinjang: 1.2 million imprisoned, 10% dead, per year, according to UN. Obviously that would make it more than double the claimed Gaza death toll PER YEAR (so that would make it 4x as big during the Gaza conflict, except it's been going on for far longer than the Gaza war). As for official figues: https://id.china-embassy.gov.cn/eng/sgdt/202206/t20220622_10...
by SamoyedFurFluff | 2025-09-14 15:59:20+00:00
Frankly it read to me more like Harris had a totally moderate response that was blown up by the right as something she is a die hard believer in. No one is dying on the hill of trans rights except for trans people as far as I see on the political stage. Republicans talk way more about trans people than democrats. Republicans pass way more laws about trans people than democrats. Republicans raise way more money on trans people than democrats. Democrats literally don’t seem to stand for anything as a unified force: government shutdowns over roe v wade overturn, start reading Epstein files into congressional record, refuse to cooperate with a single republican bill until they get some red meat for their base. I haven’t really seen anything and I’m not even particularly leftist. I just can’t imagine a single time democrats threw a massive shitfest for red meat, but I hear it nonstop in republican spaces.
by bethekidyouwant | 2025-09-14 15:59:25+00:00
Ever since you were born, the factory bagging the food you eat have been lubricated with PFAS. Also perhaps youve seen the HDPE label on plastic food containers? That’s fluorinated. Basically everything is and always has been. It’s only recently there’s been a move to say hey this is probably bad for us. We can stop. But it’s expensive and there’s no good alternative so things are just going back to the way they always were.
by righthand | 2025-09-14 15:59:34+00:00
I mean insinuating that a sect of a political party is “extremist” or “far” into some ideology because they see the current political atmosphere is futile is not discussing politics in good faith.

Most lefists/extreme right/far-left/far-right are not the “far right” or “far left” caricatures depicted by the media, internet comments, or the mouth of the political party conventions.

> I can probably guess your next is answer is that the DNC and/or billionaires suppress their campaigns?

Of course the DNC suppresses their campaigns. Most NY Dem leaders have not even backed Mamdani even after winning the primary (not to mention that Cuomo has an entire billionaire backed Super PAC still funding him after he lost the primary badly). You being able to guess that doesn’t make the idea false. The idea being a talking point doesn’t make that truth less valid.
by clscott | 2025-09-14 15:59:38+00:00
The last time you voted in The United States of America may be the last time you get a vote in The United States of America.

All three branches of The United States of America has been captured by a tyrannical government. Rights are being eroded for inhabitants of The United States of America, including its citizens.

You have no right to: safe medicine, safe food, safe water, vote.

The sooner the people recognize this and take action, the shorter it will be to reverse.

Americans have a duty to act, and act quickly: what's already been taken will take generations to regain.
by latchkey | 2025-09-14 16:00:26+00:00
What's the real reason? Fraud has been around forever now. How is it that people were able to create so many mule accounts in the first place? What sort of KYC was going on? Why start limiting bank accounts without warning?

So many questions...

Update: my Thai friend just wrote me this:

"Not in trouble, it's the Chinese and Russians money laundering. Every Russian has had their accounts suspended, this was about half a year ago, now they are slowly doing the Chinese and Brits too. Vietnam is not much better, also suspending all foreigners accounts until you can prove you have a trc here."

Update2: just saw this on IG… https://www.instagram.com/p/DOZM0ZOkUAy/
by ameliaquining | 2025-09-14 16:02:01+00:00
The truncated headline is extremely misleading; it makes it sound like they're having a currency crisis, rather than this being an anti-fraud measure. (I'm not finding any indications in other sources that there is a currency crisis or that the anti-fraud rationale is pretextual, though I could have missed something.)

(ETA: HN title has been re-edited, previously didn't have the "to curb fraud" clause.)
by panny | 2025-09-14 16:02:04+00:00
>But it’s deeply concerning to me how many people who supported an open internet and the fundamental principles that underlie that have now given up on those principles because they see that some AI companies might benefit from an open internet.

AI companies are violating copyrights. Their bots don't respect robots.txt and are crashing servers. They're very well funded in doing all of this, and nobody is enforcing the law.

Once again, we can't have nice things because of bad actors. We aren't walling off the open internet, they're just ruining it.
by trimethylpurine | 2025-09-14 16:02:14+00:00
Trump's EPA created these PFAS rules. Now re-read your comment and look how politically biased you are so much as to be seen as crazy.

Here is the statement from the organization pushing for this.

It really wasn't hard to find either.

https://www.awwa.org/AWWA-Articles/epa-announces-changes-to-...
by estearum | 2025-09-14 16:02:20+00:00
You can agree or disagree with inmates having a right to medical care? That would require going to SCOTUS, at the very least. This right is well-established in the US.

One can agree or disagree on the question of whether transgender care is medical care, but I think the sensible position for any political party (on virtually any such question) is to defer to the scientists and medical experts who spend all day working on this stuff.

AFAIK, the then-current science said that this was one of the only effective treatments for gender dysphoria, and under our Constitution inmates can't be denied medical care, even if it gives somebody the ick or would be politically inconvenient at the next election cycle.
by tyleo | 2025-09-14 16:02:33+00:00
I agree that she had a moderate response. I think it appeared that she was dying on the this hill because she didn’t address it in her 2024 campaign yet it received so much air time in Republican ads.

I also agree that it feels like Democrats don’t stand for anything. But I think by leaving that space open they let ads like this paint what they stand for.
Show HN: HumbleOp – A debate platform where every post ends in a one-on-one duel
by Fra_MadChem | 2025-09-14 16:04:21+00:00
Hi HN,

In my spare time I built HumbleOp, an experiment in structured online debate. I’m not a full-time developer — this is a side project I’ve been working on evenings and weekends.

How it works:

A user posts an idea or opinion.

Everyone else can comment once, no threads.

The community votes. Importantly, a vote doesn’t mean agreement — it means you want that commenter to face the author.

When the timer ends, the top comment duels the author, one message at a time, publicly.

Others can react with likes or red flags. Too many flags and the winner is swapped with the runner-up.

Duels end when both click handshake, or if both top challengers are flagged out.

Direct duels are also possible, skipping the voting phase.

I built this because I was frustrated with how debates online usually go: endless replies, chaos, and low-effort takes dominating thoughtful ones. The strict rules are intentional: I wanted to see if structure could make discussions clearer and fairer.

Stack: React + Tailwind (frontend), Flask (backend), Postgres (database), deployed on Fly.io.

It’s live here: www.humbleop.com

It’s still a work in progress, so bugs are possible. Feedback is welcome — on the concept, the UX, or the tech.

Thanks for reading.
by avazhi | 2025-09-14 16:04:50+00:00
What does their perspective have to do with whether the distinction is real or not?

It's a matter of logic and also a matter of what is most likely to be true. The language used is obviously in relation to the rather important legal dichotomy between those two things; victims of PFAS toxicity and their opinions are irrelevant. What does matter is what the executives and people making the decisions at the corporations knew, thought, and intended by doing certain things, like covering up studies that demonstrated the harms, continuing to ship products they suspected were harmful, or suing whistleblowers to keep them quiet about putative harms. The original commenter was insinuating (I've quoted it throughout this thread) that the corporations were intentionally poisoning people, as if making them sick was itself a motive for shipping these products. Whether that is true or not is to be determined from the mental state of the executives I just talked about. There is no evidence I've ever seen that any of the corporations, like Dupont or Marlboro, ever intended to poison people and give them diseases for some underlying profit motive. To suggest they had was, as I said, lazy thinking and a caricature.

That certainly doesn't mean those corporations weren't negligent. But, as has been my point this entire time, intention is everything - intention is literally the entire difference between a murder charge and a manslaughter charge. It's not trivial at all. And imputing intention to cause harm (ie., the opposite of using Occam's Razor) because you dislike a corporation or person is just sloppy thinking.
by trimethylpurine | 2025-09-14 16:05:00+00:00
You've now given data that makes my argument. I don't need to provide citation where we're talking about your data.

What more do you need here? Immigration from third world countries increases crime and murder, having nothing to do with guns.

The previous data you gave tries to make the opposite point by including immigrants that aren't from third world countries, I.e. irrelevant. You for sure see how that's bad faith and I'm not going to entertain further discussion if you won't sustain that you're in the wrong for doing that.

You've also summarized the data with an interpretation that isn't honest to the numbers.

That last part absolutely ends the discussion for me. I'm interested in science not politics.
by tyleo | 2025-09-14 16:05:08+00:00
Yes, politicians can agree or disagree with policy. That is their job. E.g., “here is a good policy we don’t have which we should enact,” and “here is a bad policy we should get rid of.”

I’m not saying I agree or disagree with this policy but the point of politicians is to advance policy one way or the other which requires agreeing/disagreeing.
by shadowgovt | 2025-09-14 16:05:39+00:00
For what it's worth, I am actually aware of a funeral where the priest digressed into the idea that the deceased died on a road where people are known to drive recklessly and this is the expected outcome of that behavior, and prayed that the city would take the necessary steps to make that road safer so that we had fewer funerals like this one. It did not go over well with the congregation. ;) Mourners usually want to focus on the individual, not how that individual fits into a larger societal structure.

> He was targeted and intentionally killed, for reasons that have no demonstrated connection to the issue.

Right, you get it.

> This is simply not comparable to an observation that some number of unspecified people might die as a result of a policy.

... You were so close to getting it. Your argument is like asserting that every instance of a class is its own unique thing and has no relation to the class. When the whole point of object oriented programming is that we can make sweeping changes to the behavior of instances with relatively small modifications to the class.

The class is policy. The instances are deaths.

Kirk was not only satisfied with but advocated for the current structure of the "GunRights" class. Then someone operating under the rules of an instance of that class killed him.

It's not right that he's dead. It's not right that any of the victims of gun violence at the hands of strangers died. But in Kirk's case, one must observe that he died as predictable consequence of the political philosophy he espoused. It's just usually other people paying the price for his philosophy, not him.

(Also, I'm fairly certain you know already that your mayor getting run over by a hitman metaphor breaks down because hitmen don't use cars. That's not the tool designed for killing people. There's another tool designed for killing people, one far more effective at it. Hitmen use that one.)
by thrance | 2025-09-14 16:05:43+00:00
You clearly misunderstood what "if companies can freely poison everyone, profits go up" meant. It's not that the rich are poisoning people for its own sake and laughing manically to themselves. It's that removing regulations and lowering safety standards allows companies to recoup the money they were legally required to spend on upholding them, hence increasing their profits at the cost of public health. Which, I hope you'll concede, is a morally terrible thing to do.
by sunscream89 | 2025-09-14 16:06:11+00:00
I’m pretty sure the qubit is a dead end, while all the science/engineering is real and useful.

Quantum holography will give us the promise land of hyperdimensional and extradimentional computation. Abandon the linear (for the macro) once and for riddence.

When we master the holographic analog sieve of quantum domain, all future computation shall be manipulating holographic memory. Communications will change in its own right.

Consider running Fourier transforms on a quantum singularity domain (like a cradle universe). The physics and information science piece of paper becomes a hyperdimensional machine of potential (its capacity and continuity) and constructive/destructive interference (change.)

The problem we will have is rendering this hyperdimensionality back up to our antiquated digital technology.
by sublinear | 2025-09-14 16:06:55+00:00
It doesn't matter how many. Jira should be on the same level as the other tools it's commonly used alongside.

GitLab has GLQL[1]. ServiceNow has CMDB[2]. Both offer more flexible queries on any data the users can see and can return arbitrary tables. The dashboards, reports, APIs, etc. are actually useful because of that. On Jira, all you get are lists of issues and dashboard widgets that are barely more helpful that the list of issues they obscure.

This is expected to be all available out-of-the-box without plugins or other gotchas. Nobody should have to rewrite their scripts to run the same basic recurring jobs on another project or part of the company just because they're on a different instance and don't want to buy a plugin that is seldom used. The only reason anyone tracks projects with Jira is its familiarity. Hardly anyone uses the newer features that Atlassian has shifted focus towards. All anyone wants is the core UI, for that UI to not be so bloated and slow (and it's only getting worse), and a better JQL.

[1]: https://docs.gitlab.com/user/glql/

[2]: https://www.servicenow.com/products/servicenow-platform/conf...
by zzzeek | 2025-09-14 16:06:58+00:00
Animal Farm uses metaphor to make statements and observations about non-ficticious events.

a non-fiction version of Animal Farm might be: "Authoritarianism is bad. Consider the case of the Russian Revolution leading to the rise and rule of Stalin. Imagine it's like the story of a farm taken over by authoritarian pigs: <insert existing Animal Farm text here>"

the word "fiction" here is doing work for your argument that it's not qualified to do.

the US Government is making the decisions they are in order to crush the population into submission. This is the simplest and most consistent explanation with many historical parallels and an approach (known as fascism) that is described by a tremendous amount of written literature, both academic and non-academic, fiction and non-fiction. The actions of politicians must be observed and the net effect of these actions forms the basis of the rationale.
by ViewTrick1002 | 2025-09-14 16:07:26+00:00
I’m not sure where to begin. Please stop straight up lying? Nothing in this comment is correct.

In France the battle is over how large the subsidies needs to be to even get started on the EPR2 program. Driven by EDF is too financially weak to take on more projects after the recent boondoggles and that new built nuclear power simply does not deliver electricity at a price the market accepts.

That does not sound very self sustaining.

Regarding Flamanville 3 you are likely citing the report with a discount rate lower than the inflation and a 40 year pay back time, while comparing to the first ever off shore wind farm in France. You know, a prototype as regards to working with French industry and bureaucracy.

For anyone even having a slight economic understanding the writers of that report are shouting from the rooftops that investing in nuclear power is pure lunacy. But shrouded in a language allowing lobbyists and blindingly biased people to cite it.

I also love how the fastest growing energy source in human history, for which subsidies are being phased out as we speak, haven’t shown a positive ROI.

What do I now. All that private money going into renewables are calculated in making a loss.
Show HN: I made pgdbtemplate to cut PostgreSQL test time by 1.5x using templates
by andrei-polukhin | 2025-09-14 16:07:55+00:00
Tired of your Go tests being slowed down by repetitive PostgreSQL database setup?

I built pgdbtemplate to solve exactly that. It uses PostgreSQL's native template databases to create fully migrated test databases in milliseconds instead of seconds.

The problem: Traditional test setup runs all your migrations for every single test. With a complex schema, this wastes minutes in every test run.

The solution: Create one "golden" template database. Every test gets its own isolated copy instantly via CREATE DATABASE ... TEMPLATE.

Benchmarks don't lie:

- 1.5x faster for complex schemas (5+ tables)

- 37% time saved creating 200 databases

- 17% less memory usage

- Performance gains increase with schema complexity

It's:

- Thread-safe and built for t.Parallel()

- Driver-agnostic: works with both pgx and pq

- Integrates with testcontainers-go

- MIT Licensed

I'd love feedback from the HN community, especially on:

- The API design (ConnectionProvider/MigrationRunner interfaces)

- Ideas for further performance optimizations

- Security audit of the SQL formatting code

Check out the code and benchmarks on GitHub: https://github.com/andrei-polukhin/pgdbtemplate
by hnlmorg | 2025-09-14 16:09:03+00:00
I’ve never seen ‘mm’ nor ‘mn’ used in British English, where ‘m’ is a common abbreviation for “million”. But this might be a localisation.

Wikipedia does recognise ‘m’ as an abbreviation: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1,000,000

It’s definitely open to confusion but generally if you already known that abbreviation exists then one can usually deduce how to interpret that abbreviation from the context of the sentence. In this case, it’s a financial headline so I assumed it was “million”.
by YesBox | 2025-09-14 16:09:07+00:00
I think our brains are wired for hyper-compacted headline news (removes all nuance), emotional bits of info (high reactionary impact), especially if it's negative (survival instinct kicks in, makes a person feels alive).

It's (much) less work to obtain this info than other options (like walking to a store and buying a newspaper, or talking to your neighbor/friend, or doing a hobby instead).

That's my very quick take. Conserving energy once benefited us greatly, and now that feature is being used against us.
by cakealert | 2025-09-14 16:09:20+00:00
> If you have the UI layer able to grant root access, it has root access itself and is not sandboxed.

The same is true even of an operating system such as QubesOS. And it's a minimal risk.

Not providing optional root access on GOS makes it only useful if you have a constrained application in mind for the phone. I don't have time to compile GOS with root so I just use LineageOS instead.
by johnecheck | 2025-09-14 16:10:05+00:00
> There is no way to promote facts or what people think are facts.

There is no way with existing platforms and algorithms. We need systems that actually promote the truth. Imagine if claims (posts) you see come with a score* that correlates with whether the claim is true or false. Such a platform could help the world, assuming the scores are good.

How to calculate these scores is naturally the crux of the problem. There's infinite ways to do it; I call these algorithms truth heuristics. These heuristics would consider various inputs like user-created scores and credentials to give you a better estimate of truth than going with your gut.

Users clearly need algorithmic selection and personalized scores. A one-size-fits-all solution sounds like a Ministry of Truth to me.

* I suggest ℝ on [-1,1].

-1 : Certainly false

-0.5 : Probably false

0 : Uncertain

0.5 : Probably true

1 : Certainly true
by crawfordcomeaux | 2025-09-14 16:10:32+00:00
Kindly stop supporting a nation built on genocide and enslavement. The ethical path to engineering a system that's not intended to kill people is to stop it when it does and dismantle it, evolving the foundational principles used to design it in the first place. And to do all that without sacrificing more lives. Electoral reform is impossible because there's no way to say no to the entire system.
by jayd16 | 2025-09-14 16:11:20+00:00
Isn't this desire nonsensical? A visual programming language will indeed still have programming. You can't get away from the core principles of logic, event flow, etc. and that was never the point, imo. As I said, VPLs provide other advantages than that.

If you're looking for a gui configuration tool instead of a VPL... those exist too. They exist by being declarative data editors.

StateTree editors, Animation Blueprints, and discrete state machines are some possible examples of visual editors that change app functionality that strip away core programming concepts for simplicity. There's plenty of these floating around but I feel like they "don't count" while simultaneously being exactly what is asked for.
by OutOfHere | 2025-09-14 16:11:25+00:00
I have used an LLM to write code in web servers to generate data plots using SVG embedded directly in web pages. This bypasses the need for PNG generation, Javascript for rendering a plot, and also the need for a plotting library. You can see two examples in the gist d29164051477ce1b2b95b788297a1932.