MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by weinzierl | 2025-09-30 08:20:08+00:00
I had to deal with it for work a little bit and maybe my conclusions are useful to others, so here they are [1].

- EUPL is closely modeled after GPL. If you take away one thing then that: If you squint hard enough you will see GPL.

- In a sense it is closer to GPLv3. It has explicit patent related terms. It lacks Tivozation and DRM provisions, so it is not a complete match.

- Beyond what is in the GPL the EUPL tries to be explicit when it comes to license compatibility. EUPL distinguishes between inbound and outbound compatibility and it is very important to be clear when speaking about this.

- Other Copyleft licenses (esp. GPL) are NOT inbound compatible with EUPL.

- GPL (v2 and v3) are outbound compatible besides some other explicitly listed licenses.

The last point is very strange and the biggest quirk in the otherwise pretty boring EUPL. The issue is this: EUPL has some additional restrictions that go beyond GPL. On the other side the GPL does not allow additional restrictions apart from certain precisely defined exceptions ("section 6").

The mechanism the EUPL has chosen to deal with this is that you are legally authorized to switch from EUPL to GPL, and after switching, all the stricter EUPL bits fall away.

[1] I am not a lawyer, consider my vantage being that of an EU startup, also opinions my own, not speaking for my employer.

EDIT: Skimming through the other comments I got the impression that many consider the EUPL closer to the AGPL. The reason I don't see it that way is the mentioned outbound GPL compatibility which renders the additional Affero provisions toothless.

EDIT 2: See bcye's comments which point out an interesting angle that might mean that my views regarding the AGPL issue may be too simplistic.
by adamcharnock | 2025-09-30 08:21:09+00:00
That is true now, but 4-5 years ago I was starting a small ISP and prices were almost triple that. $80-$100/address seemed somewhat common IIRC, and prices only seemed to be going up. So I can certainly see an ISP looking at that and making a plan for a future where IPs cost $200+ each.

Since then prices have come down. I can only speculate that high prices caused a bunch of organisations to decide to sell their unused IP blocks. I suppose the question is: Does the market now have enough spare capacity to see us through to IPv6-only adoption at reasonable IP costs, or will we be seeing high prices again in 5+ years?
by Zacharias030 | 2025-09-30 08:21:11+00:00
I appreciate the discussion as well.

After having checked the positions you mentioned, I had put you somewhere in the 4-10 kyu range. For me this was the time when I found out how important it is to play efficient and fast and play big spots. In order to improve further, I had to learn to appreciate thickness more because of the downstream benefits. As the fighting of both players becomes stronger, thicker shape makes your side of the fight much easier and prevents everything from crumbling.

Take your first example where you suggested 1-point jump or keima instead of nobi. The main point here is about 1) liberties and 2) having your group‘s „head“ run ahead. There is also this concept of a hard head or a soft head and the nobi creates a wonderful hard head ahead of your opponents stones that can not be bullied. If you play any other move, a stronger opponent will (locally) immediately and gladly play that hane without thinking, which takes a liberty and forces you to play again to defend your stones. Depending on your moves, the opponent would turn your group into a big dumpling and collect very nice stones on the outside in the process.

Perhaps you would find the games of Kitani Minoru or Lee Chang’ho inspiring.
by graemep | 2025-09-30 08:21:37+00:00
He has modified EUPL (bad idea to modify licenses) so it recreates one of the problems he has with AGPL (that a lot of companies will not use software licensed under it). If anything EUPL is less attractive to those companies if they are outside the EU as it imposes EU jurisdiction.

Other people might see the above as an advantage, as you can dual license and those who do not like AGPL can buy a commercial license.

He has misunderstood the AGPL (there is no requirement to send changes to the original developer, only make them available to users).

His modification of EUPL is to explicitly remove one of his advantages, by reducing compatibility with all but two (AGPL and OSL). h It looks like his EUPL is not compatible with the EU's EUPL as a result of that modification, and the only way to mix the two would be to license as OSL or AGPL.
by Jensson | 2025-09-30 08:22:59+00:00
Using SSH to get the project files is not a good example of a hard to learn skill they need for the job, they should just have provided a zip on a web page or so or sent it directly to the user.

So to me it seems most of the test was just "have you done these trivial things before" rather than test if they can program web apps.

It would be like the carpenter being forced to buy nails and docking them points for now knowing where the closest shop to buy nails in are and taking time to look that up. Of course it is better if some look it up quicker, but its not a core part of the job. Then when they drove there, you gave them a manual stick car, so the ones who were used to automatic fumbled around in the car, also bad look! So now you see carpenters who drove manual were much better, as your biases told you! That is not really the skill you should care about, it is very quick to tell him where it is.
by bramhaag | 2025-09-30 08:23:31+00:00
Perhaps someone else can clarify this, but I've been cautious about using this license instead of AGPLv3, because even though it includes this clause to close the SaaS loophole:

‘Distribution’ or ‘Communication’: any act of selling, giving, lending, renting, distributing, communicating, transmitting, or otherwise making available, online or offline, copies of the Work or providing access to its essential functionalities at the disposal of any other natural or legal person.

It still allows someone to relicense your work under GPL-2.0-only and GPL-3.0-only (amongst others):

‘Compatible Licences’ according to Article 5 EUPL are: — GNU General Public License (GPL) v. 2, v. 3

Both these licenses have no such clause. Does this not make the attempt to close the SaaS loophole void?

edit: some words from the FSF

it gives recipients ways to relicense the work under the terms of other selected licenses, and some of those—the Eclipse Public License in particular—only provide a weaker copyleft. Thus, developers can't rely on this license to provide a strong copyleft.

https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.en.html#EUPL-1.2

To me, this seems very poorly thought out. I see no reason to use this license over AGPL (or even GPL).
by jcjgraf | 2025-09-30 08:23:54+00:00
Please see my other comment where I share more details about VMScape and why Xen is not affected. In short, it is because branch predictor state is flushed when transitioning to Dom0. Indeed, it has nothing to do with type of kernel... And yes, LLMs were at work. The "quote" in the article is not an actual quote...
by camilomatajira | 2025-09-30 08:23:57+00:00
Nice article, I love Make and your blog looks sharp. I would suggest to provide the beginner friendly version in which all the rules are hard coded, so that a beginner can profit and don't be freightened. And then, introduce the problem of needing to add rules by hand for each new dotfile, and then provide your solution using Make's builtins.

I also suggest putting the complete final version of the Makefile at then end, so I can copy it.

Regards,
by PapstJL4U | 2025-09-30 08:24:00+00:00
>I get it, but the alternative is what? Get model release forms from anyone in a public space every time you turn your video camera on?

Only if you publish the video, if there is indentifiable information or when the person is the center piece of your video.

If you are professional company, you have profesional that do this for you. If you are not professional, you can make the time, because you are not doing it often.
by GeertJohan | 2025-09-30 08:25:06+00:00
The EUPL isn't as explicit as AGPL.

> — ‘Distribution’ or ‘Communication’: any act of selling, giving, lending, renting, distributing, communicating, transmitting, or otherwise making available, online or offline, copies of the Work or providing access to its essential functionalities at the disposal of any other natural or legal person.
by atypeoferror | 2025-09-30 08:25:42+00:00
Well, pharmaceutical manufacturing for one:

> India is the world's largest provider of generic medicines by volume, with a 20% share of total global pharmaceutical exports. It is also the largest vaccine supplier in the world by volume, accounting for more than 60% of all vaccines manufactured in the world.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pharmaceutical_industry_in_I...

This I am less certain on, but I believe there is a fairly robust space program (not many countries have that). I’m sure there is more.
by sfn42 | 2025-09-30 08:26:09+00:00
I agree. I've never done heroin but I understand the withdrawal is absolutely horrible.

I stopped using nicotine this month. I've been using snus which is a Nordic product similar to chewing tobacco. You put it under your upper lip, the type I've been using has significantly more nicotine per dose than a cigarette. Like 2-4 times as much, 25mg per dose.

It was fine. The first day was pretty hard for me, I was sitting next to a lady who kept her snus box on her desk and I really wanted to bum one but didn't. Day two was a bit easier, day three easier still and after that I felt like I was done. I'm on day 16 now and hardly think about it any more.

It's strange because I've been using nicotine for almost two decades and I've been wanting to drop it for most of that time, even did drop it once but blundered and started again a year or so later. I've tried and failed to quit so many times, but the times that it's actually worked have always just felt like a state of mind difference. Like I didn't really want to quit the other times. When I really decide and all doubt is gone it's quite easy to quit. It's just hard to get to that state of mind and keep it.
by contrarian1234 | 2025-09-30 08:28:08+00:00
> still postdoc 10 years after getting his Ph.D

I think this is just a matter of what position you want. A classmate of mine wrote one paper on machine learning (he basically barely know how to run the Python to train some ancient neural net), did a short 1 year postdoc with his advisor and got a job as a professor at some no-name university in Japan.

I'm sure your classmate could get a professorship somewhere if he wanted. If his goal is to be a professor at Caltech then it's a different story
by jcjgraf | 2025-09-30 08:28:55+00:00
Yes, Xen is indeed protected thanks to using Dom0 for running the pendant of Linux's userspace hypervisor (QEMU, fircracker, etc.).This is because transitions to Dom0 lead to a branch predictor flush. See my other comment for more information. As you say, firecracker is equally affected by VMScape as QEMU is...
by Rogach | 2025-09-30 08:29:30+00:00
That sounds quite dystopian. I did consider this possibility, but thought that it was sufficiently far in the future. Sad that this future already arrived :(

But can you elaborate on how this is enforced? Probably by requiring IMEI registration? (supposedly with a carve-out for tourists, something like "a new IMEI can be used for two weeks without registration, after that it stops working")

If it's IMEI-based, then probably you can still have an alternative phone that will use WiFi hotspot from the "certified" one. Speaking from experience here - we had a problem in Indonesia where we were unable to register a phone due to bureaucratic shortcomings, and so we bought a cheap phone to serve as a hotspot. Inconvenient, true, but still workable.

Also, I don't know how IMEIs are implemented at hardware/software level. Maybe there are ways to spoof them somehow?
by skissane | 2025-09-30 08:30:09+00:00
The US mixes up fixed line numbers with mobile numbers, so you can’t tell them apart based just on the number.

In Australia, mobile services are a separate area code-so a mobile number tells you that it is a mobile number, but nothing else-once upon a time, the first few digits told you the telco, but with number portability that is largely no longer true.

Unless it is the teachers at our kid’s school, who use Microsoft Teams to call parents on their mobile, so it looks like it is coming from a fixed line
by A_D_E_P_T | 2025-09-30 08:30:55+00:00
> DHH condemned detailed and strict CoC like the Contributor Covenant as a “trojan horse” that should be purged from projects. ESR went even further, asserting that CoC are nothing more than a “tool for troublemakers” and that the best course of action is to delete them entirely from projects.

At this point, in 2025, does anybody seriously doubt that they're a "tool for troublemakers"? A lot of people who would otherwise contribute see a hyper-particular CoC, written by an HR type or an aspiring lawyer, and walk away. Others don't bother to read the CoC and may later be dragged through coals over something exceedingly minor, despite their contributions.

In open-source, the best policy is to avoid CoCs and avoid those who write and promote them.
by kouteiheika | 2025-09-30 08:31:11+00:00
> Why is it okay for a model to serve up paraphrased books but verbatim copies from the Pirate Bay are illegal?

Because they are not actually memorizing those books (besides few isolated pathological cases due to imperfect training data deduplication), and whatever they spit out is in no way a replacement for the original?

Here's some back-of-the-envelope math: Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone is around ~460KB of text and equivalent to ~110k Qwen3 tokens, which gives us ~0.24 tokens per byte. Qwen3 models were trained on 36 trillion tokens, so this gives us a dataset of ~137TB. The biggest Qwen3 model has ~235B parameters and at 8-bit (at which you can serve the model essentially loselessly compared to full bf16 weights) takes ~255GB of space, so the model is only 0.18% of its training dataset. And this is the best case, because we took the biggest model, and the actual capacity of a model to memorize is only at most ~4 bit per parameter[1] instead of full ~8 bits we assumed here.

For reference, the best loseless compression we can achieve for text is around ~15% of the original size (e.g. Fabrice Bellard's NNCP), which is two orders of magnitude worse.

So purely from information theoretic perspective saying that those models memorize the whole datasets on which they were trained is nonsense. They can't do that, because there's just not enough bits to store all of this data. They extract patterns, the same way that I can take the very same ~137TB dataset and build a frequency table of all of the bigrams appearing in it and build a hidden Markov model out of it to generate text. Would that also be "stealing"? And what if I extend my frequency table to trigrams? Where exactly do we draw the line?

[1] -- https://arxiv.org/pdf/2505.24832
by Luker88 | 2025-09-30 08:31:29+00:00
Wonderful!

An AGPL-like license without the enmity that Stallman and GPL have.

IANAL, but I skimmed it and I see:

* a patent grant

* no extra clauses

* static/dynamic linking seems fine with compatible licenses (edit: unclear to me if proprietary can link (edit2: I find articles stating this is not viral and linking is always permitted, but there are section covering "essential functionality" in the license, so shim layers should not be allowed?))

* modifying for SaaS is redistributing

* clear list of compatible licenses (notably excluded: BSD/MIT/Apache)

* you can use both "this version" or "or later"

* trademarks not included

* no liability, except for "willful misconduct or damages directly caused to natural persons". Does not exclude from other law requirements.
by contrarian1234 | 2025-09-30 08:32:19+00:00
Most academic topics have near-zero applicability to industry. A classmate just got her PhD on some paleoclimate records of biomarkers in permafrost. It's not a job. If you love the topic and do research in it.. then awesome. Otherwise, hope you enjoyed the ride. You're gunna have to retrain for the next gig.

The training otherwise is a bit of a joke.. you can write some janky Python to shit out crappy plots. You learn to skim papers.. and some bare-minimum stats. It's not worth doing for some nebulous "scientist training"
by xg15 | 2025-09-30 08:33:07+00:00
I would say the same delusion even applies to the field of machine learning in general.

The "API" of trainable algorithms is essentially "arbitrary bunch of data in -> thing I want out" and the magic algorithm in the middle will figure out the rest.

Because "thing I want" is given as a list of examples, you're not even required to come up with a clear definition of what it exactly is that you want. In fact, it's a major "selling point" of the field that you don't have to.

But all of that creates the illusion that machine learning / "AI" would be able to generate a robust algorithm for any correspondence, as long as you can package up a trainset with enough examples and shore up enough "compute" to do the number crunching. Predict intelligence from passport photos? Or chances of campaign success from political speeches? No problem! Economic outlook from tea leaves? Sure thing!

The setup will not even tell you if your idea just needs more tweaks or fundamentally can't work. In both cases, all you get is a less-than-ideal number in your chosen evaluation metric.
by andsoitis | 2025-09-30 08:33:14+00:00
> I never understand why people don't talk about banning the general usage of sugar, probably has far worse effects on societal systems than smoking does. (attention, fatness, hormonal imbalances)

Here is the US Health Secretary talking about it: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/apr/22/rfk-jr-sugar...
by tinco | 2025-09-30 08:33:39+00:00
Yeah this is insane. This is basically what was already happening, i.e. cloud companies offering a Redis service under some generic name. It barely slows them down. I can't understand how legal counsel would not have objected to adding this clause, and who would push for such a clause? It effectively removes the innovation from it. Why choose EUPL over GPLv3 if it can just be relicensed?
by StopDisinfo910 | 2025-09-30 08:33:44+00:00
Easy, don't tax so much that it becomes ineffective. There is a sweet spot to find.

Honestly, I dislike smoking as much as anyone else but I frankly oppose the way Australia is taxing cigarettes and alcohol. These are sin taxes. They are high to deter people from doing things they want to do. That's overreach.

Taxes should aim to cover externalities. That's fair. Your choice forces a burden on the collectivity which it's trying to recoup. Above that, that's just coercion and paternalism. Plus it disproportionally affects the poor but I guess the moral police pushing for this kind of taxes sees that as a benefit.
by jmkd | 2025-09-30 08:34:06+00:00
No expert on the topic but surely a manually rotated system achieves the benefits of tracking without the overhead of installation and maintenance for an automatic system. As long as the panels are easily reverted to default position when no one can go and rotate them through the day (thinking domestic setup in the garden).

Plenty of people have gardens and land that is tended to multiple times through the day anyway (for gardening, animals, workshop activity etc).
by Rogach | 2025-09-30 08:34:36+00:00
Thanks for the info! They do look nice and the prices are very affordable.

I'm a bit worried by their lack of focus, though - looks like they are spreading themselves a bit thin, they are trying to build a lot of different gadgets all at once (keyboards, speakers, laptops, headphones, etc). Building a phone is hard enough, trying to build all other things might dilute the valuable development resources.
by JdeBP | 2025-09-30 08:35:45+00:00
E.U. regulations cover all sorts of licences, from driving licences

* https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?&uri=CELEX:3...

through the Dessenheim, Sierentz, Dannemarie, Staffelfelden, and Seebach licences

* https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A...

to navigability licences.

* https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A...

Not everyone just assumes that a licence that has passed through a E.U. Commission approvals process is a software copyright licence.

That said, this is a personal WWW site of someone named Javier Casares, apparently a system administrator. Any E.U. citizen can rent a eu. subdomain. The E.U.'s own domain is europa.eu. and the E.U. Commission's own blurb gets straight to the point in its first sentence:

* https://commission.europa.eu/about/departments-and-executive...
by berkes | 2025-09-30 08:35:46+00:00
If you have a way to "punish the misbehaving motorcycle riders" while allowing or even welcoming the rest, please share.

We've researched this. It's a European wide issue that's discussed, researched, tested and so on, throughout many communities and places. So far, there's no way to prohibit only the bad actors.

Part of the "infrastructure" changes would be things like speed bumps. Where it pays off to ride below the speed limit, and hard to ride above it. But that then makes some misbehaving drivers use their "0-100 in 8 sec" that their motorbike builder once promised. Going through four gears on a 500m stretch. The disturbance and noise gets worse then.

It gets harder because many solutions will harm all the other legitimate usage too, or harm them worse. Speed bumps and farmers' harvesting with large tractors are terrible for our houses that then literally shake on their foundation.

If, like us, you look at "motorcycle riders" as a community, it makes sense to point at that community and say: solve the danger and disturbance that those few amongst your community clearly pose to others. Because the alternative is that we'll have to "punish" your entire community.
by bcye | 2025-09-30 08:36:01+00:00
> 3) However, don’t forget the text of the EUPL: “Should the Licensee’s obligations under the Compatible License conflict with his/her obligations under this (EUPL) License, the obligations of the Compatible License shall prevail”. So there is double coverage, managing license conflicts and giving priority to the compatible license in such cases. But as none of the compatible licenses come into conflict with the EUPL by prohibiting the essential points of publication of the source code and coverage of remote distribution (closing the SaaS loophole), these obligations, that are the core of the "reciprocal" condition, persist for the derivatives concerned.

Presumably, it does close the loophole, though it's not very clear-cut. https://interoperable-europe.ec.europa.eu/collection/eupl/di...
by gmac | 2025-09-30 08:36:50+00:00
Because that would be utterly ludicrous? I enjoy a few small sweet things every day as part of a healthy diet. This harms nobody, me included.

Much better to make more effort in schools to teach people how to cook good food (including enough fat and salt that it's actually tasty). Plus maybe change some relative prices so that they eat less sugar on average.
by burnt-resistor | 2025-09-30 08:38:07+00:00
CoCs are like having faith in some prerequisite magical spell is first necessary to control and compel people to behave in a proscribed manner when, in reality, they are more like EULAs and Cider House Rules that (almost) no one reads. Paperwork cannot transform people. Perhaps their limited marginal value is existing to show that community is defended and there is a clear and thoughtful process to arbitrate and resolve conflict rather than falling into either extremes of absentee inaction or heavy-handed, summary, expedient, arbitrary expulsion.