MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by WinstonSmith84 | 2025-09-04 20:21:06+00:00
good questions - and your questions are, or could be, actually rhetorical. Yes, they are the validator and thus they control the transactions. It could be as simple as having a Database at the end ... Well I can think of two things:

1- they start by owning all validators, maybe they expect to open validators to other entities at some point in the future. If these entities don't collude together, we could expect some sort of neutrality

2- Marketing - because crypto is coming at an ATH and why not getting some good marketing for free (or almost)

And people mentioning costs, this is not particularly relevant. L2s are extremely cheap by most standards, let alone by Stripe standards which charge horrendous fees.
by sensanaty | 2025-09-04 20:21:11+00:00
> and I have more ability to jump ship if don’t like my current job.

This is a complete non-issue in presumably the entire EU (I can only speak for the Netherlands personally, but it's a safe bet except for perhaps Germany)? You can't get fired for literally no reason like in the US, but you can terminate your contract at any time you want with usually 1 month notice. I've literally never encountered any job where it was more than 1 month's notice unless they were very, very high up the food chain like Principal Engineer or VP level, and at that level it's presumably similarly difficult to leave even in the US.

I've actually just quit my job at the start of this month, and I had 16 paid vacation days leftover, so I'll be working for less than half the month before starting my next role. Sure seems like a lot of ability to jump ship to me.

And getting hired hasn't felt harder or more complicated for me than my experience for US companies. Interview processes are the same, you get hired ASAP with companies understanding there's notice periods before you can start working, For the businesses there's a 1-3 month probationary period where you can be let go (most common is 1 month) for no reason, and it's also not like it's impossible to get rid of truly bad performers either, there's just rules in place to make sure companies don't fuck over their employee's lives on a whim. They have to actually prove someone is a detriment to the team, shock horror, in order to fire them.

The alternative in the US for the majority of people not working in big tech for big tech salaries is that the fear of getting fired at any moment in time constantly looms over your head. You're always 1 power-trip away from getting fired by some egotistical dickhead, on top of already having much poorer worker protections, not to mention the state of US healthcare and the fear people have there.

Me? I have a permanent contract and can live safely in the knowledge that if they want to get rid of me unfairly, it'll cost them big time, and even if that happens I know I don't have to stress about ending up in medical debt for the remainder of my natural life should something unfortunate befall me or my loved ones.
by asim | 2025-09-04 20:21:28+00:00
> Who will run validator nodes?

"A diverse group of independent entities, including some of Tempo’s design partners, will run validator nodes initially before we transition to a permissionless model."

I think Zuck tried to do this. It was called Libra or Diem or I can't remember what it ended up being. Ultimately trust is what matters. In the end whether it was regulation or governments or anything else that killed it, it's only going to work if people can trust you. They trusted you with fiat payments, maybe they'll trust you with crypto. The thing to note, you'll win over the US centric crowd but it's unclear if it will translate truly across borders to Europe, Russia, China, etc. I'm guessing that doesn't matter but just remember what happened. Make sure to be honest about who's actually going to run the payment rails here.
by Esophagus4 | 2025-09-04 20:21:44+00:00
The chances of being Keith Gill are probably the same as winning the lottery, and I would bet most retail actually lost money in the meme stock craze.

None of those are reproducible investment strategies, they’re “dumb money” gambles.

If someone did turn $100k into $2m using crypto and options, the smartest thing they could do is to cash out and go home, as they will never get more lucky than that.

[not financial advice]
by babblingdweeb | 2025-09-04 20:22:20+00:00
I was just talking to younger coworkers about this recently. Mid-90s to early 2000s: FORTRAN, COBOL, C, and C++ classes all had handwritten code parts for homework, handouts, exams, etc. This wasn't just pseudocode, you had to have full syntax, variable declarations, correct spelling of functions, etc. You frequently had to show code optimization, debugging, etc even on paper. Wild times!!

* All of those classes also had lab time (some dedicated, similar to a chemistry class), info on how to get the IDE if you had $ access to a computer at home, and alternatives as well.

Personally, I see more value in pseudo code (written or typed) and sketch type diagrams (analog or digital) than handwriting code. However, it was WILD and amazing to watch the gray-hairs of those days debug your code on paper!
by judah | 2025-09-04 20:22:35+00:00
...that's OK.

My app works fine online or offline. If you're offline and you ran out of disk space and the cache got evicted, ok, you can't use my web app offline.

(And, if you're out of disk space, all bets are off. You're gonna have other, more significant problems beyond a guitar chord chart site not working offline.)
by echelon | 2025-09-04 20:23:21+00:00
I work in the media space. AI is absolutely ripping through film, TV, and advertising.

Several medium sized studios I've talked with are bidding $50k for projects (eg. Netflix, HBO, Proctor & Gamble are typical clients) they used to bid $400k on, and they're winning more contracts. They don't need to shoot in person in Venice for pharma ads or animate elaborate TV show intros anymore.

This is having a huge impact to the fundamentals of how they do business. They haven't laid anyone off yet, but they're talking about the ramifications if this gets cheaper.
by physicsguy | 2025-09-04 20:23:21+00:00
There are podcasts I like but a lot of the popular ones in the UK are very self indulgent. The Rest Is Politics is definitely one of those. They're also able to be opinionated in a way that the BBC's output obviously can't be as a state broadcaster. I always find the BBC output more professionally scripted, presented and edited as well, even if the content is similar. Some podcasts are horrendous at not balancing the audio - Not Another One (politics) is one of those even though I think it's great.
by mattmanser | 2025-09-04 20:23:45+00:00
I know you probably feel you're being fair, but you're not.

There's a dichotomy in development where bad PMs can prosper in a way bad engineers can't.

There's no skill test for PMs, unlike engineers. Bad PMs can look like good PMs to senior management simply because they hold tons of meetings, kiss ass, over promise or steal credit. Any of those bad traits can fool senior management. But those are bad PMs.

On top of that, when you have a bad PM, there's a good chance the Devs themselves will step into the role and still deliver a product.

The bad PM will still take credit, obviously. A bad PM is often circumvented instead of exposed.

Conversely the opposite doesn't work, a good PM + bad Devs turns into never ending dev cycles. The PM looks bad even though there's nothing he can really do, unless he can fire/hire. The good PM cannot circumvent bad engineers.

And in the end, to find bad engineers you can just look at their code. If you don't have the skill to do that, or don't employ someone you know that can, you probably shouldn't be in the software development business.
by wahern | 2025-09-04 20:23:57+00:00
> Just make all the standard library random interfaces back onto a real CSPRNG

That's what OpenBSD has done for the traditional C and POSIX randomness APIs.

Also, re your earlier comment, OpenBSD's arc4random API is everywhere now except linux/musl and Windows. POSIX now has getentropy, which on recent Linux kernel will be as fast as arc4random_buf. But it would be nice if musl got the arc4random API, which includes arc4random_uniform for generating 32-bit numbers in the interval [0, N), minimizing the risk of people screwing that up.

Unlikely vendors will takes OpenBSD's approach to the historic PRNG APIs, but they're almost all there for the arc4random API. Also, the former approach is less ideal than it sounds; the latest versions of PUC Lua, for example, use an included non-CSPRNG rather than merely binding the historic C APIs. Explicitly using the arc4random API means the semantics are explicit, too, and you can more easily audit code. It's conspicuously missing an API for floating point intervals, but perhaps that'll come along.
by ViewTrick1002 | 2025-09-04 20:24:09+00:00
> We're currently adding stablecoin functionality to the Stripe dashboard, and the first user is an Argentinian bike importer that finds transacting with their suppliers to be challenging.

Using crypto to dodge currency controls?

Of course I agree that currency controls are bad. But, if the use case for crypto keeps being fostering illegal transactions then it doesn’t solve anything a functioning economy needs.
by dgfitz | 2025-09-04 20:24:28+00:00
Sure, I agree with all that, well-said. “Dickhead, asshole, douchebag, fuckstain” are terms of endearment in some of my social circles. Context matters.

Tone and body language are like 80%+ of in-person, verbal communication.

We need to be very careful to, as I mentioned, not “abuse” the term abuse to the point where it becomes meaningless. If everything is abuse, nothing is abuse, and we need to invent a new term.
by yieldcrv | 2025-09-04 20:24:29+00:00
okay. I thought it was insightful enough. I've worked in many economic unions where that mismatch existed and needed further investigation to steer organizations towards the desired outcome.

pointing out that the current efforts don't do that is all that needed to be said. your criticism of that comment, to me, proved that you understood the comment enough that one needs to look further into the motivations.
by kji | 2025-09-04 20:24:50+00:00
> the third party, unaffiliated, developer experience is better on an EVM than it is is on a traditional centralized database.

This is definitely a take, given how easy it is to write a program with security bugs using Solidity due to specific concerns like reentrancy that only exist due to the unique way smart contracts work. The inability to "undo" a fraudulent or mistaken transaction without requiring all validators to fork the chain also makes this a non-starter for many developers.

> your users pay to update the state of your application

Also a weird thing to call a "feature" for developers when this actively drives away potential users.
by cjensen | 2025-09-04 20:24:50+00:00
No.

Most tests were underground after the first decade or so once the effects of fallout were better understood. Plus underground testing reduces the affected radius and conserves area for additional testing.

Also note that most tests were "small" yield weapons rather than the really big hydrogen bombs. It's easy to forget how large the range of power there is among different nuclear weapons. E.g. Tsar Bomba was 4000 times more energetic than the bomb dropped on Hiroshima.
by banashark | 2025-09-04 20:25:28+00:00
Hearing from past coworkers and friends who have been on the job hunt at some point within the last 5 years has been interesting with regards to what is scrutinized in a candidates profile.

During the hiring spree it seemed like other than ensuring that a candidate was able to (or was able to be trained to) operate at the average expectations of a role's level.

With the demand for software engineers dipping below the supply, recent anecdotes have painted a different picture.

Some of the rejection reasons I've heard for candidates that have otherwise passed all rounds:

* They don't have enough experience in our stack (need to be able to hit the ground running)

* Their experience in our stack, while of a suitable duration, was 2 or 3 jobs ago, so it's not "recent enough" to hit the ground running

* They have worked too many jobs within a timeframe

* They've worked too few jobs in their career

While these of course vary company to company, the former 2 are interesting in this context in that I wonder how an automated candidate <-> requisition matcher would go about gathering data to make it's decision. Will the stack you work in now cement you into that stack for a longer period of time? Will lack of blog posts or other publicly scrapable details about your knowledge or abilities with certain technology impact your matching score?

Related to the above, if those get gamified, I wonder how that might affect a surge of slightly altered blog posts to make one look more experienced with a technology. And when will the SaaS startup get created that will auto-post technical blogs copied/altered from other existing tech blogs.

It will be interesting to see how this all progresses.
by jltsiren | 2025-09-04 20:25:31+00:00
It would have been an ambitious goal in 2010. But the fundamental issue with it is similar to buying offsets.

If you are connected to the grid, the power you use is effectively generated by the power plant with the highest marginal costs. That often means fossil fuels. It doesn't matter whether you are buying generic power from the grid, or if you have a contract stating that the power you use is generated by renewables or nuclear. If you disconnect from the grid, the overall demand goes down, and some of the most expensive generation capacity is no longer needed.

In the long term, if there are many customers buying explicitly carbon-free power from the grid, it may increase the construction of new carbon-free generation capacity. But that effect is difficult to quantify.
by bobbylarrybobby | 2025-09-04 20:25:34+00:00
You'd still have problems.

1. There are no variadic functions so you need to take a tuple: `|(Col<i32>("a"), Col<f64>("b"))|`

2. Turbofish! `|(Col::<i32>("a"), Col::<f64>("b"))|`. This is already getting quite verbose.

3. This needs to be general over all expressions (such as `col("a").str.to_lowercase()`, `col("b") * 2`, etc), so while you could pass a type such as Col if it were IntoExpr, its conversion into an expression would immediately drop the generic type information because Expr doesn't store that (at least not in a generic parameter; the type of the underlying series is always discovered at runtime). So you can't really skip those `.i32()?` calls.

Polars definitely made the right choice here — if Expr had a generic parameter, then you couldn't store Expr of different output types in arrays because they wouldn't all have the same type. You'd have to use tuples, which would lead to abysmal ergonomics compared to a Vec (can't append or remove without a macro; need a macro to implement functions for tuples up to length N for some gargantuan N). In addition to the ergonomics, Rust’s monomorphization would make compile times absolutely explode if every combination of input Exprs’ dtypes required compiling a separate version of each function, such as `with_columns()`, which currently is only compiled separately for different container types.

The reason web frameworks can do this is because of `$( $ty: FromRequestParts<S> + Send, )*`. All of the tuple elements share the generic parameter `S`, which would not be the case in Polars — or, if it were, would make `map` too limited to be useful.
by hannob | 2025-09-04 20:25:40+00:00
> But that comes at the cost of speed

That is mostly a myth.

I mean... technically, yes. But the cost is so marginal that you will have a hard time even measuring it unless you generate gigabytes of data.

For pretty much all common use cases like generation of ids, tokens, etc., you can use a secure random number generator and it will not impact your performance in any meaningful way.
by slg | 2025-09-04 20:25:41+00:00
>If someone did turn $100k into $2m using crypto and options, the smartest thing they could do is to cash out and go home, as they will never get more lucky than that.

And the true problem here is that this would be true if they turned $100k into $200k, $100k into $300k, $100k, into $400k... That is always the problem with these crypto discussions, it's all hypothetical, but anyone in this actual situation would have felt an incredible pressure to start taking their profit before they got to the most astronomical returns that are often cited.
by bravoetch | 2025-09-04 20:25:56+00:00
The middleman that bitcoin is cleaved from is banks (that have control over all balances and transactions), and payment processors (same controls). Previously these were required unless you handed physical cash to someone. Now electronic transactions are free of those controls and the associated risk. Exchanges are not bitcoin, you can transact freely without them. Wallet providers are not bitcoin, they are 100% optional. Nodes don't act as middlemen, they are fabric.
by godelski | 2025-09-04 20:26:31+00:00
> This is a red herring. None of these feedback mechanisms existed for decades of driving

Sorry, I want to make sure I understand you correctly.

Are you claiming humans didn't have the sense of sound nor the sense of touch until relatively recently?

Or are you claiming that as soon as someone enters a car these senses go away?

Are you arguing you can't hear things while in a car? Windows up? Windows down? In an open car like a convertible, jeep, or a model T?

Are you arguing that you don't feel bumps in the road?

Are you arguing you can't tell the difference between driving on asphalt vs concrete?

I think we're done here because you need to get an EKG as soon as possible.
by joemi | 2025-09-04 20:26:44+00:00
I don't think "it should be obvious". The world we live in is one where caber tossing, curling, boxing, cheese rolling, quidditch, and sepak takraw (to name just a few) are all sports. So "softball with a 16-inch diameter ball" really isn't so unbelievable of a concept that it should be obvious that it doesn't exist.
by NoiseBert69 | 2025-09-04 20:27:19+00:00
Infineon 60GHz IoT FMCW radar modules have all datasheets published. That's super rare for Infineon - usually they are the worst NDA-hell on earth.

Chinese vendors sell uC+Radar-Module units on Aliexpress for around ~20-30€. They Infineon-based boards are super easy to spot by looking at the Antenna-on-Chip layout.

You can cut off their head (microcontroller) and directly attach your favorite uC onto the SPI bus to talk to them. Or use the existing one.. not overly complicated to reverse engineer the schematic.

Example: MicRadar RA60ATR2
by jfactorial | 2025-09-04 20:27:20+00:00
TL;DR: recent changes in Section 174 IRC will _incentivize_ R&D spending, not cause layoffs of researchers and developers.

Section 174 allows businesses to deduct their domestic R&D expenses.

In 2017 Trump made businesses have to amortize these expenses over 5 years instead of deducting them, starting in 2022 (it is common for an administration to write laws that will only have a negative effect after they're gone). This move wrecked the R&D tax credit. Many US businesses stopped claiming R&D tax credits entirely as a result. Others had surprise tax bills.

Trump's second term work is now to undo the disaster he caused (S.O.P.). Congress has reversed the amortization rule and businesses can again deduct R&D expenses immediately.

This is a good thing rolling back a bad thing. The bad thing might have been responsible for layoffs a few years ago, but it will have only positive impact on 2025.
by jonathanlb | 2025-09-04 20:27:35+00:00
> external factors (abuse, addiction, sickness, etc.).

Beside factors that body's performance, also consider factors that impact well-meaning parent or caregivers' _presence_ in the home, such economic realities, e.g., parents working multiple jobs, parents with challenging schedules, single parents, lack of community support (e.g., availability of a supportive neighbors or families.)
by smoovb | 2025-09-04 20:27:56+00:00
Counterpoint. Tether has grown into one of the most profitable, well funded companies on the planet. Their past growing pains are irrelevant to where they are now. They make $30-50 million per day with just 200 employees. They are the 18th largest holder of US debt, ahead of UAE and Germany. Last year, Tether achieved $14 billion in profit, surpassing Pfizer, Tesla, and BlackRock. https://www.bitget.com/news/detail/12560604740855
by sixothree | 2025-09-04 20:28:34+00:00
It's not like you have a lot of options. You won't be changing these people. It's not your job. But you do need to protect yourself.

It is okay to interrupt them and walk away, especially to any stranger or faint acquaintance. And to say "I'm not sure I agree with that" and let them keep talking will at least let them know where you stand.
by awdjob | 2025-09-04 20:29:02+00:00
In this episode we get our app (Klipshow) hosted for the first time using Kamal (manually at first) and a $7/month DO droplet. Our rails app, postgres, and anycable services are all running in the same box for now, we'll keep this our staging environment after we get a better production setup in place (load balancer behind services that we can scale better is what I'm thinking)

I'm always so nervous to post on Hacker News but I really hope you all enjoy!
by physicsguy | 2025-09-04 20:29:10+00:00
I find Political Currency better these days since Ed Balls and Osborne are at least both people who had very key political roles in their own right (Balls during the Blair government in the Treasury with Gordon Brown, then Shadow Chancellor, Osborne as part of Cameron's rise to power and Chancellor), plus there's the odd tidbit of opinion on the current government which you sometimes wonder whether is coming through from inside knowledge due to Balls being married to Yvette Cooper.
by enobrev | 2025-09-04 20:29:13+00:00
I'm ok on speed. Not 10x or anything, but I've been writing full-stack web apps and websites from scratch for a quarter century.

The issue is getting the LLM to write _reasonably decent_ code without having to read every line and make sure it's not doing anything insane. I've tried a few different methods of prompting, but setting up a claude sub-agent that's doing TDD very explicitly and ensuring that all tests pass after every iteration has been most effective.

My first attempt was so fast, it was mind-bending. I had a "working" App and API running in about a day and a half. And then when I tried to adjust features, it would start changing things all over the place, LOTS of tests were failing, and after a couple prompts, I got to a point where the app was terribly broken. I spent about a day trying to prompt my way out of a seemingly infinite hole. I did a more thorough code review and it was a disaster: Random code styles, tons of half-written and abandoned code, tests that did nothing, //TODOs everywhere, and so, so many tweaks for backwards compatibility - which I did NOT need for a greenfield project

At that point I scrapped the project and adjusted my approach. I broke down the PRD into more thorough documentation for reference. I streamlined the CLAUDE.md files. I compiled a standard method of planning / documenting work to be done. I created sub-agents for planning and implementation. I set up the primary implementation sub-agents to split up the spec into bite-sized portions of work ("30-45 minute tasks").

Now I'm at the opposite side of the spectrum - implementation is dog slow, but I rarely have to read what was actually written. I still review the code at large after the primary tasks are finished (comparing the feature branch against main in my IDE), but for the most part I've been able to ignore the output and rely on my manual app tests and then occasionally switch models (or LLMs) and prompt for a thorough code-review.