MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by autoexec | 2025-09-12 21:05:30+00:00
> There is no indication that we will, no matter the administration, as a society/civilization/species will do a single thing to avert the worst case climate scenarios.

I don't think that's fair. Other countries have made considerable progress at getting to their climate goals, although there's an argument that those goals weren't set high enough or near enough. As much as China is still an environmental trainwreck they've made impressive progress on air pollution.

Because the US is such a huge polluter, I think a US administration that was seriously interested in dealing with climate change and willing to say no to billionaires would make a meaningful difference. We've seen investment in "green" do well for other countries, and even here to a lesser extent.

I suspect that climate change will do tremendous damage to our civilization, and that any global conflict which takes place as that damage progresses will only exacerbate things. The damage caused by climate change will certainly bring about new conflicts as well. Billions of climate refugees will be forced from their homes and need to go somewhere, and even the places they try to flee to will be hit with natural disasters and feel increasing pressure as once heavily populated areas will become less habitable due to heat, desertification, fire, flooding, storms, a lack of drinking water, etc.

I think that however dark the times ahead are, our actions right now will matter, and that's especially true if we just admit defeat and accept powerful people making the situation much worse by plundering and hording as much as they possibly can.
by nicce | 2025-09-12 21:05:32+00:00
> It’s really not, nuclear inherently requires extreme costs to operate. Compare costs vs coal which isn’t cost competitive these days. Nuclear inherently need a lot more effort refining fuel as you can’t just dig a shovel full of ore and burn it. Even after refining you can’t just dump fuel in, you need fuel assemblies. Nuclear must have a more complicated boiler setup with an extra coolant loop. You need shielding and equipment to move spent fuel and a spent fuel cooling pond. Insurance isn’t cheap when mistakes can cost hundreds of billions. Etc etc.

Without the fear of dual use, we could just enrich the fuel to higher levels and refuel once per 30 years.
by yongjik | 2025-09-12 21:05:46+00:00
Koreans also have the concept of punishment being proportional to offense. You tell Koreans an illegal immigrant worker in Korea was rounded up in chains and stuck in places where they have to take a dump in front of others, at least half of Koreans would say "What the fuck? We are supposed to be better than that!"

Now tell them it wasn't just an ordinary illegal immigrant worker, but a group of, let's say, BMW employees from Germany, building a new car factory in (some Korean city), but apparently they had the wrong visa.

Koreans would say "Have we completely lost our goddamn mind?"
by derektank | 2025-09-12 21:05:56+00:00
I'm not disagreeing with your general point but in the specific case of Bitcoin I can't think of any laws that have been passed which make it highly inconvenient to use relative to other financial assets. If anything, it seems like legislators (at least in the US) have taken something of a laissez faire attitude toward the technology. Regulators have been more aggressive (e.g. the Treasury) but they're largely just enforcing existing laws which, again, apply to other financial assets.
by vintermann | 2025-09-12 21:07:03+00:00
Thank you. It's an answer, but it's very light on the details.

How do you deal with the fact that the large majority of the population in Crimea (and probably a lot of Donbas too) preferred union with Russia over staying in Ukraine? Do you deny them the vote for a generation? Ethnically cleanse them? Or do you give them a big hand on the rudder in the new unified Ukraine, like they used to have? Either solution seems like it's a powder keg for war to break out again.

So do war reparations, of course. That's basically how WW2 happened. As I see it, the best case scenario of Russia paying for all the damages is that it becomes an impoverished breeding ground for a lot of vengeful terrorism. Maybe you're more optimistic?

Also, is this peace agreement really more likely to happen if Moscow has been London blitz-droned into submission? When did your country last sue for peace in such a situation, and how long did that last? I don't have much sympathy for "political realists" in practice, but in theory, I agree with them that you should expect other states to behave like your state would have behaved.
by cmrdporcupine | 2025-09-12 21:07:36+00:00
I personally would love to see a heavily moderated, curated, security hardened crates repository as an alternative to crates.io that contains only well-maintained, security audited, organizationally vetted crates.

For organizations that have regulatory, safety, strong security etc concerns (a market Rust is a natural fit for) this could be critically important. But even more so I would just use it. I am tired of my `cargo tree` rapidly turning into an exploding maze. I don't want 3 different MD5 or rand or cryptography or http packages used in one static linkage, and I don't want them bringing in an exploding maze of transitive dependencies of their own.
by Sohcahtoa82 | 2025-09-12 21:08:05+00:00
> a better autocomplete

This is 100% what I use Github Copilot for.

I type a function name and the AI already knows what I'm going to pass it. Sometimes I just type "somevar =" and it instantly correctly guesses the function, too, and even what I'm going to do with the data afterwards.

I've had instances where I just type a comment with a sentence of what the code is about to do, and it'll put up 10 lines of code to do it, almost exactly matching what I was going to type.

The vibe coders give AI-code generation a bad name. Is it perfect? Of course not. It gets it wrong at least half the time. But I'm skilled enough to know when it's wrong in nearly an instant.
by lossolo | 2025-09-12 21:08:23+00:00
> The situation is a fair bit different with Taiwan.

The only real difference here is that the U.S. has even fewer advantages in this hypothetical conflict. China, like Russia, has hypersonic missiles and drone swarms both of which are aircraft carrier killers and carriers are still the U.S.’s main way to project power so far from home. According to Pentagon estimates, in a war with China, the U.S. would only have about a month’s worth of ammunition. The supply chain situation would be a disaster, and Japan and South Korea likely wouldn’t risk directly supporting the U.S. because they’d be stuck right within China’s range, not thousands of kilometers from home.

Whatever’s written on paper is meaningless if the country guaranteeing your security has too much to lose, it’s just paper. Ukraine had guarantees, Poland had guarantees in 1939, and plenty of other countries in history had guarantees that didn’t hold up. What really matters are actual capabilities, war scenarios and costs.

Colby knows that[1], because he has all the data and understands the political reality. And the reality is that the U.S. could lose the war, and all the economic and political consequences of losing its hegemony would follow.

All of America’s enemies in history were weaker than the U.S. In the last 100 years, the U.S. hasn’t fought an opponent anywhere near its level of strength. Even in WWII, three quarters of Nazi Germany’s forces were destroyed by the Soviet Union, that’s a fact you won’t see in Hollywood movies about brave heroes. Now the U.S. would be facing the world’s factory, a country with the resources, political system and industrial capacity to actually win that war.

1. https://subscriber.politicopro.com/article/2025/09/pentagon-...
by LexiMax | 2025-09-12 21:08:25+00:00
> The weirdest part to me is that people still don’t seem to understand this?

It's possible to understand this perfectly and yet prefer to try and argue a more reasonable interpretation, hoping whoever you're talking to won't pick up on bad faith.

What I really don't get is what makes them so convinced that the state apparatus they're such a fan of won't be turned on them? Even if you look like you belong, say the right things, hold the right opinions, you never know when you're going to accidentally get on the bad side of someone who is willing to tell a convincing lie or has connections.

They're either not the brightest bulb in the shed, or they're not actually from the US and have no skin in the game.
by Bender | 2025-09-12 21:08:58+00:00
I used my ouija board to summon the spirit of Peter Zeihan and the spirit said that the US would just wait until their dependence on oil and other imports increase even more and then a blockade would stop all ships destin for Asia. I personally think the board is wrong but time will tell. The ouija board won't shut up about Patreon.
by TheRoque | 2025-09-12 21:09:09+00:00
First of all, I won't visit your site, i get the warning: "MOZILLA_PKIX_ERROR_INSUFFICIENT_CERTIFICATE_TRANSPARENCY"

Second, I don't really understand the point, if agents are doing the job, and no humans are in the loop, then why would anyone use this website, instead of just... using the most popular LLM in the market ?
by pessimizer | 2025-09-12 21:09:27+00:00
There were also cases that just invalidated it in place. It was a dead patent. You still can't call turning cards to indicate use "tapping" though.

edit: to be clear, anyone can copy every single element of any board game, as long as they don't infringe on the game's copyrights or trademarks i.e. the art and the text, including the names of things. This is absolutely true in the US, but not necessarily true in other countries, and I'm pretty sure false in Germany. Also, there is a European alliance of board game designers who will blacklist retailers that sell your copied game, and the sites that promote it.

Monopoly harassed the game "Anti-Monopoly" forever over this, but eventually when the law became clear, realized they would lose, so settled by paying the designer and giving him a perpetual license to any IP involved in the mechanics of Monopoly so there wouldn't actually be a court decision recorded that officially invalidated their patents (I'm not sure if it was still Parker Brothers by the conclusion.) They could theoretically go after people still, and probably have sent letters (everybody who was going to get rich off the next big board game in the 60s and 70s made a Monopoly clone.) But after the Anti-Monopoly guy published about the experience, everybody knows that any threats are toothless.
by epistasis | 2025-09-12 21:09:39+00:00
China is building US and EU designs of reactors at a fraction of the costs in the US and Europe.

Your examples of regulatory asterisks are on the design side of things. I don't think that the cost of capital for Vogtle & Summer in the US, or Flamanville and Olkiluoto in the EU, were excessively high. As for your 3rd point, there were tons of adjustments during the build of Vogtle, which is a big reason for its large cost overruns. Regulation didn't necessitate those changes, they were all construction bungles.

Which I think leads to your point 2, construction competence, being the primary cause, which aligns with everything else I have read on the subject. For example, another poster pointed to this paper:

> We observe that nth-of-a-kind plants have been more, not less, expensive than first-of-a-kind plants. “Soft” factors external to standardized reactor hardware, such as labor supervision, contributed over half of the cost rise from 1976 to 1987. Relatedly, containment building costs more than doubled from 1976 to 2017, due only in part to safety regulations.
by cpursley | 2025-09-12 21:09:43+00:00
Here's an AI overview of working illegally in SK btw:

> Working illegally in South Korea can result in deportation, a fine of up to 30 million KRW (approximately US$22,000), and a ban on re-entry for up to five years. Employers who hire illegal foreign workers also face significant penalties, including fines of up to 20 million KRW (around US$15,000) and/or imprisonment.
by lovich | 2025-09-12 21:09:54+00:00
I bet they’re thinking more “so you blackmailed us into investing in you, and you arrest our people who are there making that investment happen”

I cannot honestly believe that you think any group of people on earth would look at this situation and then think that they should have just followed the rules better.

The South Korean government is already saying that the US needs to fix its visa program if it wants the investment[1]

[1] https://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_internatio...
by wnevets | 2025-09-12 21:10:12+00:00
> We need to drive down the costs of implementing nuclear energy. Most of it are fake costs due to regulation.

I shouldn't be surprised by this comment. There are so many people who believe we should allow more pollution in the air we breathe and water we drink [1] just to increase the profit margins for shareholders.

[1] https://www.npr.org/sections/shots-health-news/2025/05/14/nx...
by layer8 | 2025-09-12 21:10:30+00:00
That limitation will be trivial to lift once UTF-16 compatibility can be disregarded. This won’t happen soon, of course, given JavaScript and Windows, but the situation might be different in a hundred or thousand years. Until then, we still have a lot of unassigned code points.

In addition, it would be possible to nest another surrogate-character-like scheme into UTF-16 to support a larger character set.
by gpm | 2025-09-12 21:10:36+00:00
> Renewables make the net-demand curve (demand - renewable generation) very lumpy which generally favors dispatchable (peaker plants, batteries, etc.) generation over baseload.

Even without renewables in the equation, the demand side of the curve is already extremely lumpy. If you're only affordable when you're operating near 100% of the time (i.e. "baseload") you simply can't make up the majority of power generation. Batteries are poised to change this - but at that point you've got to be cheaper than the intermittent power sources.
by roncesvalles | 2025-09-12 21:10:48+00:00
>The LC interviews are like testing people how fast they can run 100m after practice

Ah, but, the road to becoming good at Leetcode/100m sprint is:

>a slow arduous never ending jog with multiple detours and stops along the way

Hence Leetcode is a reasonably good test for the job. If it didn't actually work, it would've been discarded by companies long ago.

Barring a few core library teams, companies don't really care if you're any good at algorithms. They care if you can learn something well enough to become world-class competitive. If you can show that you can become excellent at one thing, there's a good chance you can become excellent at another thing.

That's basically also the reason that many Law and Med programs don't care what your major in undergrad was, just that you had a very high GPA in whatever you studied. A decent number of Music majors become MDs, for example.
by thaumaturgy | 2025-09-12 21:10:57+00:00
Interesting, I was under the impression this was more common than maybe it is. I know the hosting market has gotten pretty bad.

So, I'm currently building pretty much this. After doing it on the side for clients for years, it's now my full-time effort. I have a solid and stable infrastructure, but not yet an API or web frontend. If somebody wants basically ssh, git, and static (or even not static!) hosting that comes with a sysadmin's contact information for a small number of dollars per month, I can be reached at sysop@biphrost.net.

Environment is currently Debian-in-LXC-on-Debian-on-DigitalOcean.
by tea-coffee | 2025-09-12 21:11:06+00:00
Imagine if Richard Feynman used his IQ as a metric for deciding whether he should become a physicist. Physics would not be the same.

I am certain that there are mathematicians below, near, and above an IQ of 145 that all have great research productivity. IQ tests do not approximate the creativity, effort, and collaboration required in a mathematician. Not to mention the dubious nature of the 145 claim.

Of course, there are some people that will have a greater aptitude for mathematics than others. But you do not need to be a genius, and this is echoed by Terence Tao [0].

[0] https://terrytao.wordpress.com/career-advice/does-one-have-t...
by lucideer | 2025-09-12 21:11:07+00:00
> Sure, it might cost more

I think this is more than good enough to be the "straight answer" you're looking for all on its own (& it's definitely not a case of "it might" - it definitely will).

However, on top of the cost, there's three additional reasons:

2. It will take longer

3. It will need to be geographically distributed to an extent that will incur a significantly broader variety of local logistical red tape & hurdles

4. One of the largest components that will cost more is grid balancing energy storage, which is not only a cost & logistical difficulty, but also an ongoing research area needing significant r&d investment as well.

Given all those comparators, it's a testament to the taboo that's been built up around nuclear that we have in fact been pursuing your "all renewable" suggestion anyway.
by javier123454321 | 2025-09-12 21:11:16+00:00
The US definitely has a global target for disinformation. I've lived in Latam and the propaganda was far more easy to spot. The link I gave a lot was concerted efforts by the democratic party but I do acknowledge there is Russian, North Korean, Chinese, and probably other propaganda that is looking to destabilize. However, I do think that we are at a moment where the idea of objectivity is loosing its foundation. That's a cultural philosophical moment we're having, and I don't know if you can say that Finland is above this epistemic shift.
by strnisa | 2025-09-12 21:11:31+00:00
We don't hold upfront funds. When a customer pays, we initiate Stripe transfers to the merchant as soon as the funds are available.

Paying the merchant before the customer's card payment settles would mean advancing funds, which would start to resemble lending/guarantee rather than payments, raising regulatory issues. It would also concentrate risk at the platform: defaults from one merchant’s customers could jeopardize the platform for all merchants.
by PaulHoule | 2025-09-12 21:12:03+00:00
I think you’re mostly right, particularly when it comes to the settings dialogs in Windows which have been a state of ferment since Windows 8 such that I expect many of them to be reworked in several faddish ‘mobile’ phases while some will still look like they did in the Windows 95 era.

Comparing the various nag windows on MacOS and Windows, as much as they are annoying, the MacOS nags look like a 1999 rework of the modals from the 1984 original Mac whereas the web-based ones in Windows are easier on the eyes. I have looked long and hard at x-platform UI frameworks and they are generally pretty awful and with all the affordances the web platform has Electron looks good in comparison both in terms of UX and DX.

My beef is with the tabs-inside-of-windows, windows-inside-of-windows and the frequent need to have a large number of ‘items’ open and wanting some synoptic view of all the items open in all the applications on all of the virtual desktops a modern machine can have. I try pretty hard to keep it organized but if I am listening to music in YouTube it should be trivial to find the browser tab involved to close it and it’s not.

I’m reminded of the multiple document interface

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple-document_interface

Which was big in the Windows 95 era, particularly with Office that now seems largely forgotten. When Netscape 4 hit the streets Netscape changed their home page to use <layers> which were like absolute positioned <div>(s) to get an MDI effect like the page that started this discussion. Trouble was it didn’t work and they had to revert it quickly. I told my professor that I thought I wouldn’t understand how web pages worked in six months it was changing so fast but JavaScript supremacy took at least another 12 years even if Microsoft rolled out AJAX circa 1999 it took forever in internet time for people to get the significance.
by SpicyLemonZest | 2025-09-12 21:12:22+00:00
The entire concept of a "takedown request" is a compromise solution. Platforms would ideally like to be a public square, where third parties can say whatever they want and the platform doesn't have to do much about it. Copyright holders, revenge porn victims, etc. would prefer to hold the platforms strictly liable, because on the Internet it's extremely hard to actually find the third parties. So in a variety of contexts we've found it's useful to meet in the middle: platforms are exempt from liability, but in return they have to process takedown requests, unless the third party challenges the takedown and makes themselves available for possible legal proceedings.
by gwbas1c | 2025-09-12 21:12:48+00:00
They were. Other news reports indicated that some tried to hide in sewer ponds.

Some of the workers were on tourist visas.

It's very disappointing. I just bought an Ioniq 9 and it's a great car. I'm really bothered, at both sides, (US and Hundai/LG), for letting the situation get like this.
by roblabla | 2025-09-12 21:13:24+00:00
As far as gameplay goes, palworld is nothing like Pokemon. Sure, you capture monsters in an open field, but its combat is not turn based and it has a large base building emphasis, for instance.

Now, the monster design in pal world is (I think intentionally) very close to Pokemon’s, while also giving them guns, which I suspect is what triggered Nintendo’s action. You can find plenty of Pokemon likes that match its gameplay much closer (cassette beast, tented) that haven’t caused Nintendo’s ire.
by arcwhite | 2025-09-12 21:13:48+00:00
A bunch of us in the rest of the world are making great strides in reducing our greenhouse gas emissions without it tanking our economies. Australia is, per-capita, one of the worst offenders and we're on track to reach net zero by 2050.

I think your position is based on very cynical premises. There is no reason to assume with high confidence that humans will obliterate each other in that next 50 years (especially if we do something about one of the major stressors causing conflict)

There is also no reason to believe that reducing greenhouse gas emissions over 15-20 years will cause "more" damage than the worst impacts of climate change? Can you cite sources on this claim?

It is still possible to mitigate the worst effects of anthropogenic climate change.
Show HN: Turret Tumblers
by BSTRhino | 2025-09-12 21:14:14+00:00
An online multiplayer game I made about protecting your back. Absorb damage with your easily-replaceable front-facing turrets, while bouncing, curving, or dropping shots to your enemy's vulnerable hull at the back. Would love for more people to try it!

Online multiplayer uses WebRTC and rollback netcode and is made with Easel, a game engine I've been making for 3 years that makes games multiplayer automatically.
by jauntywundrkind | 2025-09-12 21:14:21+00:00
Regardless of what social media is, my hope & desire is that we can get better at it. If we can layer in more context to the things we see online, if we can provide digestible context on who it is posting, I think a lot of the harm and damage could be ameliorated.

But we need to be in a position where folks can build & develop the social networks, where we can experiment more broadly. There's very social technologies available where humanity is afforded some hooks to improve their social media-verses.