MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by Aachen | 2025-09-29 12:56:45+00:00
Look at it from both sides. Ubuntu has a vibrant ecosystem of software (commonly known as the Debian repositories, with some attempts at launching their on on top like PPA and Snap)

Launching a mobile OS with all that software already available was miles better than what Android can offer today: loads of things exist open source for Debian that haven't been recreated as an Android app (closed or open) because the OS doesn't allow it anyway. Let alone when the project was started in 2011!

Conversely, in the 14 years that Ubuntu Touch now exists, Android developers have been busy and you'll now find mobile software that can do things that laptops can't, e.g. because they're not normally put in a car as a navigation device and don't normally have GNSS built in. So now we're in a state where you'd think: why not take AOSP and run with it? But fourteen years ago you'd think: wouldn't it be amazing if we could just run all of our tried and true software on a phone? (Fwiw, that's exactly what I did when I got my first Android (and still do today): get root and install a Debian userspace to run tools within, such as Restic for backups. I compiled a Bitcoin miner for ARM back in the day just because that would be fun and cool. There's so much you can do when you have a Linux distribution in your pocket!)

So I see your point, but consider the history. My understanding is that this project comes from a time when it made perfect sense. By now, though, I wonder the same. But I haven't tried Ubuntu Touch yet so I can't really speak ill of it and say we should use AOSP instead of them
by lnenad | 2025-09-29 12:56:51+00:00
I mean, yeah. That's why it's called an opinion.

You cannot predict whether you'll be alive tomorrow, you can be 99.99999% sure, but never 100%. The point is that based on certain information/data you can form a personal opinion, and someone can form a different one on the same data. My opinion is that AI is going to keep booming due to the enormous amount of private and government cash being injected into it with both pacifistic and militaristic application of said AI resulting in it being capable of successful interpretation of radiology imaging in 20 years.
by user3939382 | 2025-09-29 12:57:47+00:00
Agree totally. I don’t agree with the requirement that we naively treat all corporations of all sizes from 5 people to 500,000 by the same rules. When your profits are socialized across the entire world you have special obligations. Sorry not sorry. How to correctly specify those obligations to avoid unintended consequences is a separate matter, maybe not even possible but it’s an orthogonal question.
by RickJWagner | 2025-09-29 12:57:59+00:00
They’d be watching the wrong thing.

I can’t believe I’m saying this, but I think what needs to be monitored is anonymous communications in social media, gaming chats, and similar locations.

People are committing horrible, unprecedented acts of violence with political undertones. They are being goaded and encouraged by hoards of anonymous entities that may or may not be real humans. The backers may or may not be citizens of the affected locality.

I’m in favor of free speech, but it should not apply to bot armies or subversives.

Ironically, I won’t be surprised if this post is downvoted.
by crazygringo | 2025-09-29 12:59:05+00:00
Because it's a right to be lazy. And thank goodness it is.

You can inconvenience other people in a thousand different ways every day. And should be allowed to.

The idea that laziness or inconvenience ought to be outlawed... do you realize what you're saying? The kind of police state you're envisioning?

This is a principled thing. What's next, I get fined for walking slowly on the sidewalk? For holding up the line at the supermarket for a price check? For paying in dimes instead of dollar bills? Think about the legal principle you seem to be suggesting.
by freedomben | 2025-09-29 12:59:14+00:00
I commend you for your work and I think it's incredibly important, and I fully agree with what you've posted here.

However, this is still a noteworthy story because they aren't complaining about their own data being deleted. It's all data history for political ads, and it's whole point of existing was for transparency (it's even in the URL of the Google site). This is a reversal of an almost 10 year old policy
by elmerfud | 2025-09-29 12:59:52+00:00
That seems pretty insane and also this section of the policy is in the booking section. This is not in the flight check-in section. So if the ticket was purchased and the booking was confirmed and paid for then they should not have to show the credit card. Because of the purchase was made and the booking was finished they just had not checked in for their flight.

In this situation I probably would have purchased new tickets with another card and then reported credit card fraud to Delta for billing and booking and confirming a charge that they had no intention of honoring. I have a fairly decent status with Delta but I have been reconsidering using them as my primary carrier because of a number of reasons. Things like this just make it worse. They clearly don't know how to read their own policies because if there was a problem at the time of booking the booking should have said it was tentative and to bring the credit card to the ticket counter like the policy says. If nowhere as part of the purchase did it say you must present the card during check-in or prior to check in at a Delta ticket counter then I would argue that this policy doesn't apply as it's written.
by StopDisinfo910 | 2025-09-29 13:00:03+00:00
Arch is less flexible but AUR wins for me over overlays. I find writing and modifying Arch pkgbuild a lot easier than Gentoo ebuild.

Ebuild offers a lot of functions and "magic" which looks nice in theory but actually means you will be lost if you don't write them often. Arch pkgbuild look like a shell script. Adding a random patch to an existing package is extremely easy.
by chrischen | 2025-09-29 13:00:08+00:00
I don't understand why people take bad coding practices and just let AI run with it and then expect nothing but poor quality code. Nothing about the AI revolution here changes how good software has always been written. Write tests, use a typed language, review code. If you have good patterns, good procedures, AI fits right in and fills in the blanks perfectly. Poor AI results tend to be the pot calling the kettle black.
by awongh | 2025-09-29 13:00:22+00:00
The 2nd order effect that not a lot of people talk about is price: the fact that model scaling at this pace also correlates with price is amazing.

I think this is just as important to distribution of AI as model intelligence is.

AFAIK there are no fundamental "laws" that prevent price from continuing to fall, at least correlated with Moore's law (or whatever the current AI/Nvidia chip development cycle is called right now)- each new generation of hardware is significantly faster/cheaper than the next- so will we see a ChatGPT-5 model at half the price in a year? (yes I know that thinking models cost more, but just on a per-token basis)
by anovikov | 2025-09-29 13:00:30+00:00
That's the thing, failure stories are entirely uninteresting. I tried so many things, almost all of them ended with "i built and tried selling it but no one was buying". What is it to learn from it, for anyone?

The only two exceptions have been, when once i was simply scammed. Lesson learned: to never get a partner onboard unless it's done in a way that i hold they keys in a way that he physically can't scam me: always pretend to trust, but never really trust anyone. Especially since people who can't be trusted are those you instinctively trust the most because well, it is their job to get people to trust them. But that could be an eye-opener to some 20 years ago when it happened, but hardly is anymore: the entire world is now a low-trust society, so hardly anyone - even a fresh 25-year old guy i was back then - could make this mistake nowadays.

And the other one, is kind of funny! I made an app that allowed people to back up full hard disk, physical, or logical paritions of any file system supported on Windows back then, and re-create them either 1:1, or turning them into FAT32 partitions, onto any other physical device, if need be, adjusting the size. While building and trying to sell it, i talk to another guy who, at the same time, built a similar app, mine was a lot better than his but he had some fresh ideas so we communicated a lot. After a few weeks, i make several grands of sales and was very happy. But then i had a few refunds because several clients complained on performance (some probably have tried it on damaged file systems, some were real bugs, but no one knows). I felt too bad about making people so upset and after few days of moral struggle, put the app down and quit the whole thing. And the guy who made the other app was the founder of Parallels, he's now a billionaire - the app was Acronis True Image.
by jmkni | 2025-09-29 13:00:42+00:00
I can relate to a lot of this.

Where I find AI most useful is getting it to do tasks I already know how to do, but would take time.

If you understand the problem you are trying to solve well enough to explain it to the LLM, you can get good results, you can also eyeball the outputted code and know right away if it's what you are after.

Getting it to do things you don't know how to do is where it goes off the rails IMO
by roenxi | 2025-09-29 13:01:32+00:00
I'm reasonably confident you literally mean the corporations have to do the archiving since the article is about a corporation not doing it. Philosophically you just picked a random subgroup in society to do the archiving. If we're going to pick people who have to do this by law, why not force the archivists to do it? They've already got the skills and experience. Probably willing to do it voluntarily if there is some money in it from the government, but I suppose if we're committed to forcing people to do it there can be some sort of taskmaster drag them back to the archives if they try to sneak out early.
by ajsnigrutin | 2025-09-29 13:01:39+00:00
I kinda miss the unix philosophy... one tool for one job. A PDF reader should read PDFs, there's no need for it to have its own (possibly paid) cloud service and an AI chat bot.

I do get why some integrations are beneficial (eg. office software with text editing, spreadsheets and a database, so you can generate eg. letters with data from a database, etc... but every service needing its own cloud and adding a useless AI chatbot is just a useless overkill for me.
by tinco | 2025-09-29 13:01:39+00:00
Right, my apologies for downplaying it. That you control both the hardware and the software through the entire stack has tremendous benefit, especially for this type of customer. My point was if you as a customer don't value that aspect of Oxide's pitch, which you obviously are much better at fully conveying, then you'd be seriously considering Dell/HPE/Supermicro as well.

For what it's worth the last time I had to procure a small cluster the offer Dell made was ridiculously overpriced, didn't meet the specifications I asked for, and the whole experience didn't inspire confidence in the software they were pitching either. We were a small underfunded startup so we were never gonna drop 200k on that storage solution (0.5PB HDD + ~80TB SSD), but if we did have that kind of budget we probably would have gone with one of the smaller but more focused parties there instead like maybe TrueNAS, I bet there's a beautiful market for Oxide as well in that segment.
by permo-w | 2025-09-29 13:01:52+00:00
>First of all, any such regulation is a regressive tax on small businesses.

your first argument is that it harms small businesses

it's really not an issue to set up laws such that small businesses do not have to follow them. the DMA is a perfect example

your second argument is that there are privacy implications

okay then require the data to be anonymised
by petercooper | 2025-09-29 13:02:07+00:00
"Citizens will be on their best behavior because we are constantly recording and reporting everything that’s going on"

Video games and YouTube can't be entirely to blame for the significant falls in alcohol consumption and the night entertainment industry generally. People don't want to get drunk, do something stupid, and end up on blast all over the Internet now that everyone's carrying a camera connected to the entire world in real time.
by atoav | 2025-09-29 13:02:16+00:00
It is always interesting to view such principles as part of iterative feedback loop rather than the truthism it is:

1. Observation: 80% of users only interact with 40% of the software

2. Conclusion: lets cut part of that 60%, since those are rarely unused features

3. Observation: 80% of users only interact with the 40% of the remaining software

4. Conclusion: lets cut..

You get the idea. In reality the most important thing is that users perceive your software to be able to solve their problems. If you want them to spend money you need to give them the feeling your software could also solve their problems if they came around in a slightly different shape. And those different problems may be covered by the unused features.

If you for example look at 3D software, that bone rigging system may be used by only 2% of users for 1% of the time, but a much higher fraction of users may not even consider your software if it doesn't have that feature in comparison to other software, even if they don't need it yet.
by waste_monk | 2025-09-29 13:02:49+00:00
> Hypothetically it would be legal to display that in public in the US

Would it? I'm certainly not a lawyer or ITAR expert, but I would think that if you walked through a public space where you couldn't positively confirm that everyone present (and everyone who might view it transitively via video recordings, live streams, etc.) was OK to access the materiel on the shirt, that would be considered an export and you'd be in big trouble.
by mockingloris | 2025-09-29 13:03:01+00:00
TLDR: Psychological Egoism

Think of egoism like a single-threaded algorithm assuming all actions optimize for self. Altruism suggests a multi-threaded model where some processes prioritize others’ well-being. Data from user behavior (empathy-driven actions) and system design (evolutionary efficiency) supports a hybrid model—humans aren’t just “selfish” codebases.

Debated since Hobbes, it’s challenged by:

- Butler’s Stone: Pleasure is a byproduct, not the goal. - Science: Biology (altruism aids survival), neuroscience (motivation ≠ pleasure), and psychology (empathy drives genuine care) suggest mixed motives. - Analogy: Egoism is a single-threaded “selfish” algorithm; altruism adds threads for others’ benefit. Data leans toward a hybrid model.

Whenever I dive into a creative project, whether it’s freelancing for a client or tinkering on my own stuff, I know exactly what’s coming. The dopamine hit from shipping code is unreal, like a high from solving a puzzle that’s been nagging me for days. The rep boost, the financial payoff (or potential for my own projects).

But deep down, it’s not just about me. Crafting something that users love or that makes their lives easier? That’s the real magic. It’s a mix of selfish thrill and selfless impact, like a perfectly balanced commit.
by solstice | 2025-09-29 13:03:06+00:00
Mindblowing to see the staggeringly high tower of tech upon which modern chips are build. Machines capable of nanometer-precision movements at speeds subjecting their parts to 7G of acceleration... 25KW lasergun pew-pewing tin droplets 50k times per second... The sheer complexity of modern chip designs...

It really evokes Douglas Adams' quip that "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
by jimmydddd | 2025-09-29 13:03:33+00:00
A friend is in commercial real estate. If you own office or warehouse space, he finds you a company to rent the space, and help negotiate the deal. Then after the deal is done, the (very wealthy) building owner often will try to re-negotiate down the agreed to fee, or say he'll pay it in four years. The guy works for 6 months getting the deal done, is supposed to get like $25K, then the wealthy building owner says he'll give him $10K and will pay over 4 years. Crazy business.
by MontyCarloHall | 2025-09-29 13:04:42+00:00
These are all nice concrete consequences, but I’m not sure having public images meaningfully exacerbates them.

>robbers

Why would a criminal take time to comb through random, anonymous, uncategorized images of people to ambiguously identify someone who might not be home (and might not even have a house worth breaking into), when it’s much easier to just stake out wealthy neighborhoods and definitively see who’s not home and who has unsecured valuables, as has been done for centuries?

>stalkers

So said stalker would have to run facial recognition software on every image on the internet to find the handful that might incidentally contain their victim? Someone that determined would just hire or use the methods of a PI, which have long been effective at finding people who don’t want to be found.

>Google et al.

The solution here is to regulate what Google et al. can do with your data, not regulate what people can post online.
by AlecSchueler | 2025-09-29 13:04:53+00:00
I'm happy to follow up on anything I say but I ask you to consider if framing my response as weird before you've heard it or if using terms like "tin foily" are in keeping with site guidelines about arguing in good faith.

> Your prior is that Denmark wants a shooting war with Russia?

No, I didn't say this.

> let's make the obvious point and take Russia off that list of actors: they literally can't even win a shooting war against Ukraine.

You're assuming that the intended result of this apparent campaign is to actually start a war between the EU and Russia. But it could just as much be to create enough fear of one amongst EU voters that there is increased pressure towards bolstering military qualities within the EU, which in turn creates complications and financial burdens that could result in support for Ukraine being--even if unintentionally--weakened.

> Maybe you can make a brinksmanship/extortion argument, but not a "actors want a war" one from their perspective.

Yes, I could, if you could let me do so without calling me weird before I open my mouth.
by moring | 2025-09-29 13:05:04+00:00
I feel like this is the time to mention "How Big Things Get Done", by Bent Flyvbjerg. "Long planning vs. start prototyping" is a false dichotomy. Prototyping IS planning.

Put another way, refining tickets for weeks isn't the problem; the problem is when you do this without prototyping, chances are you aren't actually refining the tickets.

Planning stops when you take steps that cannot be reverted, and there IS value in delaying those steps as much as possible, because your project then becomes vulnerable to outside risk. Long planning is valuable because of this; it's just that many who advocate for long planning would just take a long time and not actually use that time for planning.
by floor2 | 2025-09-29 13:05:05+00:00
I'd imagine for most of us, our professional lives are less interesting to the general public than other things.

If I were writing about my life, there'd be roughly a single line saying "I worked in tech, which gave me the disposable income and free time to ..." and then a description of all the things I've done which are actually interesting, unique or worth sharing for the sake of advice. If I waste my final days talking about my jobs, that's a clear sign that my mind is already gone.

There are probably some HN users who are working as research scientists on clean energy or vaccines, or at Doctors without Borders or similar, who have interesting things to say about their career. For 99% of us though, we sat at a computer and did meaningless drudgery in exchange for a paycheck.
by potato3732842 | 2025-09-29 13:05:07+00:00
The fact that an out of touch billionaire might say such a thing doesn't bother me much, he's out of touch after all.

The fact that we reliably and repeatedly see peasants (i.e. any less equal animal, so everyone here) who have no such excuse cheerleading for specific implementations in furtherance of their pet issues bothers me greatly. I'd say you ought to know better, but you do. When these subjects are discussed on a general level everyone acknowledges they're bad so clearly everyone gets it on a big picture level. But when the discussion is speed cameras, surveillance at the park, siphoning off of mundane consumer financial transaction data, etc, etc those things have strong support. People are clearly happy to put up with the threats posed by pervasive surveillance lest some other peasant step the slightest bit out of line and get away with it. I think this contradiction speaks volumes about character.
by SUPERCILEX | 2025-09-29 13:05:31+00:00
This is actually a great analogy because it exemplifies the misconceptions people have about lockless queues.

In the example with multiple counters, in real life each counter could shout out a number and have people approach their respective counters in parallel. But this is not how lockless queues work. Instead, the person at the head of the queue holds a baton and when multiple numbers are called, everybody waiting in the queue goes up to the counter of the person holding the baton. Once that head-of-the-queue has made it to the counter, they give the baton to the person behind them who then drags everybody along to their counter. And so on.

The article was arguing for a lockless channel implementation akin to your interpretation of a queue with parallel access to the counters.
Show HN: Neural emotion matrix for NPCs
by mavdol04 | 2025-09-29 13:05:34+00:00
Hey! I built this system to humanize NPCs by giving them emotions using Rust and ML.

The system provides emotion coordinates (based on Russell's circumplex model) from text input or actions, with persistent emotional memory per entity. Think NPCs that remember how they feel about specific players or events.

I pre-trained a DistilBERT model on ~1k video game dialogues (Skyrim, Cyberpunk, etc.) and plan to extract and evaluate 100k+ dialogues soon. However studio/team can manually add dialogues to enrich their own dataset.

The matrix doesn't generate dialogue, it only analyzes content. When you pass text or an action, it returns emotion coordinates on the valence (pleasant/unpleasant) and arousal(energetic/calm) scale. For example:

- [0.00, 0.00] = neutral

- [0.29, 0.80] = excited

- [-0.50, -0.30] = sad/tired

I made a quick visualizer here to help understand https://valence-arousal-visualizer.vercel.app/

The system helps select which dialogue/action to play based on emotional state:

- Player says something bad to NPC → system detects negative valence → game picks from "angry dialogue pool"

- NPC remembers past positive interactions → system returns positive valence → friendlier responses available

So, the devs still write the dialogues or choose the next actions, but the matrix helps manage NPC emotional states and memory dynamically.

Here's the project structure to better understand how it works:

- src/config: Helper utilities for NPC configuration setup

- src/module: The core engine with emotion prediction, memory storage, and entity management

- src/api: FFI layer with pub extern "C" to bridge our modules with C/C++ game engines and modding tools (Unity, Unreal, etc.)

To implement it, just call `build.sh`, it will create DLL files that you can use to call the matrix functions directly in C++/C/C#.

I'd love feedback on code quality and overall architecture.

Feel free to be honest about the good, the bad, and the ugly. PRs welcome if you want to contribute!