MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
Show HN: Radiccio – Mac music player – local files, Apple Music, Plex, Jellyfin
by dmdeller | 2025-09-11 16:09:08+00:00
TLDR: Check out my Mac music player app, download the beta, and I’d love any feedback! Comment here or email beta@radiccio.music

--

Lately I’ve been unsatisfied with available options for music players on the Mac. Everyone focuses on mobile (I know, that’s where the money is) and it feels like there’s not as much good stuff for Mac as there used to be. Well, I’ve been using the Mac for a long time and I still like it, and I wanted a good music player, so I made my own.

I started with SwiftUI, since that’s what I’ve used most recently at my iOS jobs, and I like it well enough. I soon found that SwiftUI is quite a bit rougher on macOS, so I ended up rewriting a few components in AppKit, although it remains mostly SwiftUI.

I know it’s risky to build on someone else’s service, so my first and main priority was to support local files on a disk, the simplest possible way of playing music. I layered on top of that an optional SQLite db (which I call “Librarian”) for indexing and search. I used AVPlayer (part of AVFoundation) which meant I didn’t have to worry about any audio playback details, I just let the system play whatever it can play (MP3, AAC, FLAC, etc. - but not Ogg Vorbis, sorry).

But I also still use Apple Music for discovering new music, so I integrated that too. That API (MusicKit) was a bit of a mixed bag. The upside was easy onboarding (no need to sign in, just a single permission prompt) and few restrictions on what I could do with it. The downsides are a lot of missing functionality (compared to what the first-party app can do), functionality that is present often tends to be under-documented and/or broken, and the API provider has shown little interest in fixes or improvements lately, especially on the macOS platform. The most absurd point was when I realized there is (apparently?) no way to make a volume control (!).

I briefly looked into Spotify, but they don’t have a macOS SDK, and their terms prohibit commercial and multi-source use. So it seems like that possibility is going to remain closed to me.

Finally, I added Plex and Jellyfin integrations, because once I had a system that could support multiple sources, I figured why not add some more that people might be interested in.

Since I got laid off last year, I’ve been working on this full time, just by myself. I think it’s in pretty good shape for release, but I really need some more eyes on it, since we all know that devs aren’t good at testing their own code (as much as I try).

I’d also love to get some more general feedback from others; I made this all to my own taste, but people’s music listening habits vary widely. I’m sure I’ll never be able to make everyone happy, but I’m open to considering just about anything. So, let me know! And thanks for taking a look.

-dmd
by SOLAR_FIELDS | 2025-09-11 16:09:55+00:00
Not paying for bathrooms is a distinctly American thing in the Western world. For instance, the McDonalds I used to go to all the time in Sweden actually has a credit card reader on the door.

The story on why it is free is quite interesting, as it used to not be this way in America either: https://psmag.com/economics/dont-pay-toilets-america-bathroo...
by forbiddenvoid | 2025-09-11 16:10:06+00:00
My first instinct was to think this was satire and I exuded a chuckle.

My second instinct was a brief moment of panic where I worried that it might NOT be satire, and a whole world of horror flashed before my eyes.

It's okay, though. I'm better now. We're not in that other world yet.

But, for a nanosecond or two, I found myself deeply resonating with the dysphoria that I imagine plagued Winston Smith. I think I may just need to sit with that for a while.
by wredcoll | 2025-09-11 16:10:27+00:00
> I know your entire comment is rhetorical questions, but I'm going to answer them. The difference is intent. Political violence is violence against your political enemies to silence them and discourage their allies.

Sure, that's a good answer. I think that means I wasn't asking the right question though, so let me try again: does it matter if the violence is political? Is it worth using the phrase?

I'm not, this time, just trolling about semantics, but trying to reach some kind of actual point about how we use language to describe things. Every time someone is shot, at some level, it's one person, with a gun, shooting at another person, because they want that person to be dead.

I'm sympathetic to the idea of the shooter's intent being relevant during a trial, right, it seems reasonable that someone who is trying to terrify a nation/group/etc via the violence receives different consequences than someone who thought that shooting was the only way to save their own life, but does that mean we also have to then judge if they were correct about what they were thinking?

What I'm sort of groping towards is at what point is shooting someone like charlie kirk considered self defence?

Here is a hypothetical which, if you consider it, I believe isn't actually as extreme as it sounds:

If you were a person next to literal Adolf Hitler in 1945, would it be morally good to shoot him to death?

Assuming you're onboard with the idea that Hitler's crimes deserve death (either in the punishment or the prevent future crimes sense), what if we then change the year to 1944? Or 1940? Or 1935?
by theresistor | 2025-09-11 16:10:40+00:00
My grandfather also worked on it, as a technician in Los Alamos.

He had previously been working for a scientific supplies company in Chicago that was (unbeknownst to him) providing supplies to the Manhattan Project. Apparently his boss was aware of it, and when my grandfather's draft was called a letter from his boss convinced the draft board to assign him to Los Alamos instead. He was eventually able to get my grandmother, a secretary and typist, a job as a secretary in Los Alamos as well so that she could join him. She teased him the rest of their lives, because as the secretary to someone more important than a lowly technician, she had technically had a higher security clearance than he ever did!

The Atomic Heritage Foundation collects records about people who were affiliated with the Manhattan Project, as well as oral histories. Perhaps they have more information about your grandfather's work? See here: https://ahf.nuclearmuseum.org/ahf/bios/
by vkou | 2025-09-11 16:10:50+00:00
It is fascinating to see how many people are projecting their own best beliefs onto Kirk, while ignoring all his worst ones. It's a reflection of how they see themselves, not of how he was as a man.

Given his comments on the Pelosi attack, it's clear that he didn't believe that people should be safe from violence for their political beliefs. Given his comments on trans people[1], it's clear that he didn't believe that they should be safe from violence for the crime of... Being trans.

He would fail to meet the standards of civility set for this thread, or for this forum.

Politics is a barrier that protects us from political violence. The worst practitioners of it know this, and act to encourage escalation that will obliterate that barrier. So far, they've been rewarded by wealth and power for their efforts.

---

[1] Charlie Kirk has called for "men to handle" trans people "the way they did in the 50s and 60s."

Is this how someone just harmlessly opening up a civil dialogue behaves?

https://www.erininthemorning.com/p/this-must-stop-tpusas-cha...
by robinhood | 2025-09-11 16:10:54+00:00
Complex subject, beautifully simple to read. Congrats to the author.

Also: I love that super passionate people still exist, and are willing to challenge the statut quo by attacking really hard things - things I don't have the brain to even think about. It's not normal that we have better computers each month and slower softwares. If only everyone (myself included) were better at writing more efficient code.
by at-w | 2025-09-11 16:10:55+00:00
>It’s no different from VAT versus sales tax: same result, different math.

There's lots of evidence that tips vary significantly based on the traits of the customer (like the customer's self-esteem and sense of shame: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/ijchm-02...) and the employee asking for the tip (e.g. attractiveness and simple demographic characteristics: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S01674...).
by contagiousflow | 2025-09-11 16:10:56+00:00
Out of curiosity, when was the last time you were involved in the school system? Things have changed a lot over decades what time previously spent "teaching the students the actual subjects" or time spent with extracurriculars continues to be eaten away by SAT prep. The downside of a bad score is now a disastrous outcome, and other parents have continued to optimize for the best score.
by prasadjoglekar | 2025-09-11 16:11:22+00:00
Healthcare thru employment began as a perk for employees. Everyone else just paid out of pocket for regular care. And yes, it was priced into wages.

Even today, most people will pay several hundred dollars a month for insurance; the employer will pay several hundred dollars and the plan will still have a $2K or so deductible. That's a lot of money that most people make no use of at all.
by bwb | 2025-09-11 16:12:19+00:00
First, wealth tax doesn't work because it requires a ton of work to decide what constitutes "wealth," and then you have to carve out so much crap. The only wealth tax that currently works well is on real estate, as it doesn't move, and the state already taxes that.

For example, how do you tax a private business? In Spain, for example, it is a big carve-out, which leads to people never selling a company, which hurts their economy as you have tons of zombie companies. Or what people do is they take their money and buy apartments and rent them out on Airbnb, wrap them in a business, and get around the wealth tax.

The most effective way to tax wealth is to tax income, capital gains, and inheritance effectively.

But, lets say you can wave a magic wand and tax wealth (France already taxes real estate with a wealth tax + property tax).

What would a 2% yearly wealth tax raise? Maybe 15 to 25 billion a year in France, so it does nothing.
by SJC_Hacker | 2025-09-11 16:12:21+00:00
This could be useful for testing UI elements of apps ...

Modern UI applications are way too tightly coupled for my liking, and difficult to test especially if you don't practice "separation of concerns", e.g. decoupling the app logic from its presentation.

Haven't looked at the full thing but something like this might allow you to write tests for UI apps without actually having the UI backend...
by pcrh | 2025-09-11 16:12:56+00:00
> If 99% of the population don't care about your issue...

That depends largely on how the issue is presented. For example, it is now seen as "only sensible" to use pseudonyms online to protect your true identity from random people.

Why does the same not apply to your other data?

Why should the government have access to pictures of your children?
by Schmerika | 2025-09-11 16:13:01+00:00
18/19 seconds in, look at Trump's pinky finger disappear and become his ring finger.

The whole video has an AI vibe, but that moment seems like clear evidence. I've never seen a codec introduce that kind of artifact, but it's standard for AI. The background outside the window seems to jump at the same time as well.

My best guess is that this was done due to Trump being physically unable to manage a video... But if anyone has a better idea I'm open to hearing it.

It might also be cool if we can discuss whether or not this is something we're willing to tolerate from leaders. To me, it sounds like a monumentally bad idea straight out of low-budget sci fi.
by austin-cheney | 2025-09-11 16:13:50+00:00
Early in my career these books were the most helpful to me as a self taught developer:

* CSS Pocket Reference - Eric Meyer - https://www.amazon.com/CSS-Pocket-Reference-Visual-Presentat...

* XML Schema - Priscilla Walmsley - https://www.amazon.com/Definitive-XML-Schema-Priscilla-Walms...

* DOM Scripting - Jeremy Keith - https://www.amazon.com/DOM-Scripting-Design-JavaScript-Docum...
by kingnothing | 2025-09-11 16:13:50+00:00
Single payer is cheaper. The US spends more per capita than any other developed nation and is not even capable of providing health care to all of its citizens.

Move to single payer, kill the medical insurance industry, and save these costs:

The health insurance industry employs approximately 605,000-912,000 people directly. The top 10 companies generate over $1.5 trillion in combined revenue annually. Conservative estimates suggest these companies spend $45-90 billion annually on employee salaries.
by TuringNYC | 2025-09-11 16:13:58+00:00
>> Some companies look at it as a way to compete by offering better benefits than their competitors.

Do they really? I've see only select hedge funds actually advertise their health plans. Even that is usually that "we pay 100% of premiums." Most plans are impossible to assess until you actually get to the job and see the tiers available and support available. The devil is in the details -- network coverage for your specific state, co-insurance, co-pays, deductibles, % premium paid, support like QoS/tier.
by bwb | 2025-09-11 16:14:18+00:00
Every tax system has a point where extracting more means less economic activity. I think that also applies to paperwork and all the hoops you jump through. I wish I knew where it was, I think that is a big debate :)

But at some point, people give up, they don't start businesses, and if they do, they form them in the USA. Or they move nearby, a lot of French people went to Belgium the last time taxes increased a lot.
by trashface | 2025-09-11 16:14:57+00:00
ACA plans are going up even more on average than employer based plans, at the same time subsidies are being reduced.

The ACA exchanges are possibly doomed long term. People on that skew mid to lower income (but higher than medicaid), and many won't be able to afford the higher premiums - so they will drop off. So then there is the death spiral situation.
by tzs | 2025-09-11 16:15:31+00:00
The term "safety glass" just means glass designed to minimize injury when broken. There is laminated safety glass and temperated safety glass.

Laminated glass has at least two layers of glass bonded together with a plastic layer between adjacent glass layers. When broken it just forms webs of cracks but the pieces stay in place. This keeps you from getting ejected or cut by the glass.

Tempered glass on the other hand is made by rapidly heating and cooling the glass in such a way that it solidifies with a lot of internal stress. The glass at the surface ends up under compression and the interior glass ends up under tension. If you break the surface it releases all the stress rapidly resulting in the whole sheet quickly shattering into a very large number of small rounded pieces. It won't keep you from getting ejected but the small rounded pieces should only inflict relatively minor injuries.

Tempered costs less than laminated.

Most countries have long mandated laminated glass for windshields but allow tempered glass for side and rear windows. Some car makers choose to use laminated for side/rear windows to make it harder for thieves to get in, or for people to get ejected out side windows during accidents, better UV blocking, and better soundproofing.
by nis0s | 2025-09-11 16:15:32+00:00
Interesting experiment, but an AI is a good tool for getting information and analysis. The AI isn’t necessarily concerned with adhering to a philosophical school or national vision. Why should it be? It has no skin in the game, and will bend to whatever prompts it.

I think any country which adopts such tools for autonomous decision making needs to examine why it exists. If the reason you’re using an AI is that it knows more than you, then it may be expedient to become a vassal state of a country that has better AI users. Take the preceding sentence in the same spirit as A Modest Proposal.
by tedggh | 2025-09-11 16:15:43+00:00
You always need different opinions. It took me three different doctors to finally get the prescription for cancer screening due to family history. One would thing this kind of stuff is protocol but many times it is subjective, completely up to the doctor's opinion. For doctor 1 it may not be alarming enough and for doctor #3 crazy you didn't start the screenings 5 years ago. That was my experience, and this was at the same hospital network in the same city.
by tootie | 2025-09-11 16:16:10+00:00
I think it's not likely at all but we've been knocking down precedents one by one. Due process is buckling. He just murdered 11 Venezuelan civilians to see if anyone would stop him. He has deployed troops to US cities. He has endowed ICE with an unprecedented amount of money. Project 2025 has been implemented bit by bit and it endorses abusing the Insurrection Act. And he already attempted a violent coup before. It may not happen but it's not fantasy.
by HankStallone | 2025-09-11 16:16:30+00:00
Yeah, there are more great bloggers just on Substack than I can even keep up with, and that's just one corner of the blogosphere. Some of the ones I read use a partial paywall, but all of them publish some free content and some post everything for free. Blogging is far from dead; it's just not the latest thing anymore.
by throwway120385 | 2025-09-11 16:17:01+00:00
What you have is a really simplistic model of how private enterprise actually works. And what you need to understand is that economics is primarily driven by incentives, both for the individual and for the company. The only way to get different behavior out of actors in the economy is to offer different incentives, either naturally or by government fiat. Let me give you an example.

The health insurance company's bottom line profits are determined entirely by the volume of cash that they funnel to healthcare. Their profit margins are capped by law to X% of this volume. So the only way they grow year over year is to increase the amount of cash they hoover up and direct to healthcare providers. Because the stock market demands year over year growth, they are incentivized naturally and by fiat to increase the volume of cash that flows through their network. This volume of cash is directly spent on healthcare. So you can see pretty easily that the incentive structures in our society are geared toward raising costs steadily.

If you couple that with private equity buying up healthcare providers and globbing them together, then you can see that there's a whole market system being built to make healthcare more expensive so that health insurance providers can absorb more costs and therefore increase their year over year profits. PE companies increase the negotiating power with insurance companies, and costs increase. And when costs increase, the insurance company's profit increases proportionally year over year.

So what you're saying about private companies doesn't make any sense. There doesn't even have to be collusion, although United Healthcare, an insurance provider, owns Optum, a healthcare provider, and I suspect there is a lot of collusion in relationships like that. The incentives are perfectly aligned to create this situation.
by kbolino | 2025-09-11 16:17:41+00:00
Without any major changes, struct tags cannot solve the majority of the problems, because they do not propagate. The v1 MarshalJSON/UnmarshalJSON interfaces are too simplistic. At the very least, an alternative pair of interfaces should exist, which take options/flags/tags/whatever in the parameters. However, I agree this doesn't need to be in an entirely new package. It's not even hard to favor one interface over another:

switch ifc := val.(type) { case MarshalJSONV2: // new interface, always used if present case MarshalJSON: // old interface, fallback default: // type isn't self-marshaling }

The jsontext package is what's really revolutionary and needed here. The poor performance of the existing API is due primarily to the lack of a proper streaming API as the foundation. Using this as the basis for the new interfaces makes sense, and I agree that once this exists, the need for an entirely separate v2 package largely vanishes.
by snackbroken | 2025-09-11 16:17:46+00:00
I can't speak for GP but the number one reason I prefer my distro's repos over flatpaks has nothing to do with Flatpak as a technology.

Most distros have a fantastic track record of defending the interests of their users. Meanwhile, individual app developers in aggregate have a pretty bad one; frequently screwing over their users for marginal gain/convenience. I don't want to spend a bunch of time and energy investigating the moral character of every developer of every piece of software I want to run, but I trust that my distro will have done an OK job of patching out blatantly user-hostile anti-features.
by orange-blue | 2025-09-11 16:17:55+00:00
Hi HN, I'm a psychotherapist and also the dev behind this site. The project was an attempt to reflect our clinical principles in the design: privacy, calm, and the idea of how unseen patterns can gently emerge into focus.

The background is a custom WebGL2 flow-field I built (physics in a worker thread), and we don't use Google Analytics. Instead, we run a self-hosted, anonymized Matomo instance. The linked colophon has the full story.

For anyone who wants to see the code, I've open-sourced the renderer + GUI for parameters here: https://github.com/23x2/generative-flow-field Happy to answer any questions about the tech, the clinical philosophy behind it, or both.
by RicoElectrico | 2025-09-11 16:17:59+00:00
One thing NEdit has going for it is its speed when working with very large files on the order of a GB. Out of GUI editors it seemed to handle such files the best. Used it a lot as a chip designer at Synopsys, the large files in question being RCc extraction netlists. Granted it was kinda buggy, but most of us stuck with it.
by zbowling | 2025-09-11 16:18:09+00:00
Check out Pixi! Pixi is an alternative to the common conda and pypi frontends and has better system for hardware feature detection and get the best version of Torch for your hardware that is compatible across your packages (except for AMD at the moment). It can pull in the condaforge or pypi builds of pytorch and help you manage things automagically across platforms. https://pixi.sh/latest/python/pytorch/

It doesn't solve how you package your wheels specifically, that problem is still pushed on your downstream users because of boneheaded packaging decisions by PyTorch themselves but as the consumer, Pixi soften's blow. The condaforge builds of PyTorch also are a bit more sane.
by munksbeer | 2025-09-11 16:18:16+00:00
What should actually happen is that adversaries of this policy should challenge those backing chat control to a test. Those backing it get to attempt to make it work for a year in a control environment, and if at the end of that year, they still can't read every message that actors within that control environment send to each-other (which they won't), we abandon the whole thing for good.

"Bad guys" will always find a way around any attempt to stop them communicating privately. And the rest of the population will be left with governments spying on all of our interactions. The fact that this is even getting this far is absurd.