MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by javier_e06 | 2025-09-16 12:27:30+00:00
I hear you ( I am not an LLM ). I can't deny that the "You are absolutely right" gives me a shot of confidence and entices me to continue the dialog.

I am being manipulated.

I prefer the machine to reply:

Affirmative.

Unfortunately this billion dollar LLM enterprises are competing for eyeballs and clicks.
by caminante | 2025-09-16 12:27:49+00:00
>Maybe where you live that's what it's like, but that level of corruption is unheard of where I live

Genuinely, I'm curious where you live.

I don't know how you avoid such conflicts of interest entirely. And for what might seem like the most blatant of conflicts, it doesn't mean the bid winners weren't in full compliance. You might be surprised at how non-competitive these "competitive" procurements are.

People might be surprised, but nothing was necessarily fraudulent, dishonest, etc.
by gdhkgdhkvff | 2025-09-16 12:27:54+00:00
The difference is ISPs usually have monopoly/duopoly pricing power and LLMs already have freely available open source models. If one AI company decides they want to start gouging, they have to compete with other providers AND open source. And if all of the ai companies start colluding on price gouging, there’s always the option of new competitors cloud hosting open source models.

That said I do think eventually prices will increase somewhat, unless SOTA models start becoming profitable at current prices (my knowledge is at least 6 months old on this so maybe they have already become profitable?)
by TomaszZielinski | 2025-09-16 12:28:46+00:00
Yeah, well put tech wise (the ad personam part puts me off a bit, though). Personally I like hooks quite a lot, but e.g. I feel I have to check once a month or two if a memoized component (that’s „functional” in name) re-renders if its props stay the same and the only change is the state..
by docdeek | 2025-09-16 12:28:52+00:00
The FAMA story links to examples, though not all of the links remain live.

One of the first was from a police officer who had posted on social media, "If he can scream he can breath, something else was going on. I’ve been pepper sprayed with CS gas and it messes with your breathing but you can definitely still breath.”

Another was a sports broadcaster who was forced out/resigned after tweeting: "Longtime Sacramento Kings TV broadcaster Grant Napear resigned Tuesday after he tweeted "ALL LIVES MATTER" when asked by DeMarcus Cousins for his opinion on the Black Lives Matter movement.”

Some of the links, and therefore the comments, are not accessible from Europe, but the actual comments (or stories including the comments) are all there.
by highwaylights | 2025-09-16 12:28:57+00:00
Same. I often need to use private windows (calm down, I need to sign in to multiple accounts for work on an app that doesn’t support them) and I immediately hate this experience.

It was kind of bad before where safari would just open the new tab in whatever mode you were in last, but you could see and switch if you wanted to. Now they’ve removed that info and are doing the same thing so I never know what mode I’m in until I come up and down through the menus.

I can’t understand how no-one vetoed these changes.

Also TvOS 26 has noticeably impacted my TV 4k and it lags just when browsing the menus (which it never did before).
by martin_a | 2025-09-16 12:29:20+00:00
Go for it! I had a bright red case for my phone for some time. Looked great, a nice little splash of color, also worked well with the company I was working for at that time (brand color was red, too).

I've changed phones since then and at some time found red "too much", so I went with a black case because I thought I needed to look more serious. Should revisit that thought, especially when talking about phone cases... :-D
by bayindirh | 2025-09-16 12:30:07+00:00
I find modern primes much sharper than their older counterparts not because of the elements or the optical design, but from the glass directly.

Sony's "run of the mill" F2/28 can take stunning pictures, for example. F1.8/55ZA is still from another world, but that thing is made to be sharp from the get go.

The same thing is also happening in corrective glasses too. My eye numbers are not changing, but the lenses I get are much higher resolution then the set I replace, every time. So that I forget that I'm wearing corrective glasses.
by Xelbair | 2025-09-16 12:30:19+00:00
depends on use case, i don't think one language can fit all cases. 100% correctness is required for systems, but it is a hindrance in non-critical systems. or robust type systems require high compilation times which hurt iterating on the codebase.

systems? rust - but it is still far from perfect, too much focus on saving few keystrokes here and there.

general purpose corporate development? c# - despite current direction post .net 5 of stapling together legacy parts of .net framework to .net core. it does most things good enough.

scripting, and just scripting? python.

web? there's only one, bad, option and that's js/ts.

most hated ones are in order: js, go, c++, python.

go is extremely infuriating, there was a submission on HN that perfectly encapsulated my feelings about it, after writing it for a while: https://fasterthanli.me/articles/i-want-off-mr-golangs-wild-...
by zahirbmirza | 2025-09-16 12:30:20+00:00
Dear Moderators Please could you reconsider the designation of this post as being flagged? I will happily trust your judgement and conclusions. Live feeds from this region are very rare. This insight is not covered on most outlets. It is a subject seemingly of interest to this forum as illustrated by the engagement and upvotes; greater than most of my posts. Thank you so much.
by N19PEDL2 | 2025-09-16 12:30:27+00:00
I think at Microsoft they know they can do whatever they want with Windows and nothing will change.

In corporate, no manager cares about the operating system their employees use. Unless there's a significant drop in productivity by using Windows, no one will bother with the cost of switching to another OS.

In the private sector, most people buy their computers straight off the shelf, i.e. with Windows. Here at HN, we're tech enthusiasts, but out there those who know what "Debian with GNOME" means are very few, and the rest will at most complain a little about how Windows has become, but then they'll just continue to use it.
by card_zero | 2025-09-16 12:31:08+00:00
Well, hands up is lacking a verb, and fix bayonets is in a funny passive tense - or something - because it seems to say "generally go around looking for bayonets to fix", but means specifically "fix your bayonets". In fact hands up is like that too, the intent is "put your hands up", not just "put hands up" in the abstract.

Then there's informational signs, too. Wet floor is not an instruction. Labels generally aren't sentences.

Or instructions on signs: ring bell for assistance, return tray to counter, close gate after use.
by PrinST | 2025-09-16 12:31:24+00:00
Want to fit a web server into a speck of dust? Check out smews ( https://github.com/2xs/smews ) it runs with just 8k of flash and 512 bytes of RAM, supports HTTP 1.1 over TCP/IP, SLIP or others, with both static and dynamic content (GET and POST) The code is 18 years old and hasn’t moved in 10, A sandbox for budding pentesters ;)
by Rochus | 2025-09-16 12:31:40+00:00
Very interesting article, thanks for sharing. I'm still considering using SLJIT for my Micron interpreter (https://github.com/rochus-keller/Micron), which is a stack machine as well; but given the relatively low speed-up I still doubt whether it's worthwhile. It should then also support some kind of debugger (not only for JIT development, but for the user of the jitted language), which is apparently not yet supported by SLJIT.
by JKCalhoun | 2025-09-16 12:31:59+00:00
He more or less was everywhere when I was growing up in the 1970's. "The Sting", "All the President's Men", etc. "The Great Waldo Pepper" was often on T.V.

"Jeremiah Johnson" though is still a favorite of mine. Got me into blackpowder.

And surprised later when watching The Twilight Zone and he turned up as "Death": https://youtu.be/9tfyv4BZRug
by Stratoscope | 2025-09-16 12:32:17+00:00
I agree completely.

Another pet peeve is when a "percent done" message like this rounds to the nearest percent. So once it is more than 99.5% done, it says "100% done". But obviously it's not 100% done, it's still sitting there waiting to finish!

Folks, if you are ever tasked with coding an "nn% done" message, please floor the percentage instead of rounding it.
by danaris | 2025-09-16 12:32:23+00:00
Those are not analogous. You have added a direct object without preposition, which is not standard usage in such contexts.

The closest analogous sentence would be "Give apple", which works perfectly well as a choice to select in a textual medium.

This form of imperative clause does have clear and consistent rules, whether you like them or not.

And just stating that your opinion is factually correct, when it is plainly not, reeeeeally doesn't help your cause.
by surprisetalk | 2025-09-16 12:32:32+00:00
Author here! Thanks for all the feedback on my LLM tangent, quoted here for posterity:

Luckily, LLMs significantly reduce the effort/cost of therapy experiments. Consider trying the following prompt: > Please guide me through a round of ERP therapy. Start by listing universal sources of fear/discomfort/anxiety. If you find this process useful, consider trying it with a licensed human professional.

After some consideration, I agree that this advice could backfire for some people. I removed it from the essay.

Do you know of any low-friction ways to systematically tackle fears/discomforts? I really want to recommend a quick experiment that folks can try at home without doing full-blown therapy.
by henearkr | 2025-09-16 12:33:02+00:00
You persist not seeing that this is a different meaning of the same word.

And this is the other way around, "socialism" had the softer meaning of "welfare" way before the communist dictatorship even happened in History.

Here, in the "etymology" section of this WP page, you will read that all definitions (Émile Littré, Paul Janet, Émile Laveleye, Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, Adolf Held, Thomas Kirkup, Émile Durheim, August Bebel, and Encyclopædia Britannica Eleventh Edition of 1911), i.e. all definitions given before 1911 except one by Pierre Leroux, point to the general meaning of "improving society by better distributing wealth and caring more":

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

And that's why new terms were used for the subsequent authoritarian events: marxism, communism, etc. They exist because "socialist" was too ambiguous as it was already taken for the meaning of "with caring for society welfare".
by Xelbair | 2025-09-16 12:33:20+00:00
>it's there to prevent entire websites from breaking because some small widget in the bottom right corner breaks, for example.

the issue is that it prevents that, but also allows you to send complete corrupt data forward, that can create horrible cascade of errors down the pipeline - because other components made assumption about correctness of data passed to them.

Such display errors should be caught early in development, should be tested, and should never reach prod, instead of being swept under the rug - for anything else other than prototype.

but i agree - going fully functional with dynamic types beats average JS experience any day. It is just piling up more mud upon giant mudball,
by gethly | 2025-09-16 12:33:24+00:00
I learn what I need in order to achieve my task or solve a problem at hand. So that is the "i know enough" point. And that goes for everything, even my main focus do day to day work. It is good to be aware of some tech/capabilities but learning it only for the sake of learning it is a waste of time as if anything that you do not use, you forget. For example, you can learn 70% of features of a new language you are picking up and that will get you through 99% of your time. There is absolutely no need to learn the remaining 30% of the features that you'll never use.

So in short, learn what you need, but be aware of the options in case you might have a use case for some of them in the future in which case you will know where to look and what to learn.
by tuhriel | 2025-09-16 12:33:37+00:00
What kind of argumentation is this? Just because someone decides to show stuff, everybody else is also required to show themselves? e.g. If I go to a theater where the actors are clearly identified, I have to be okay to get a facial scan as well?

Some people tend to demonize porn, and it might be unethical in their eyes, but fact is: it is not illegal (in most countries). I don't argue that there are issues in the porn industry, but this is an issue with the platforms, that they don't allow the upload of non-consentual material, or and have processes to take it down. This is a 'THEIR' problem (the platform not the victims).

There some of these issues also exist in the standard movie and music industry as well. Hell, it even goes up to company executives and politics. But this is up to law enforcement do their job and to remove the illegal stuff and prosecute the involved persons, not by branding everyone as a suspect.
by DannyBee | 2025-09-16 12:33:45+00:00
I like to turn these into a madlibs sort of thing to see what I can come up with:

2024: Scale bacon-infused omelet making across multi-pan

2025: Evolve hybrid cooking for generative food

2027: Deliver an open platform for sovereign food making

2029: Realize the convergence of omelets, burritos, and hash browns

2030: Enable one seamless breakfast food
by rickdeckard | 2025-09-16 12:33:46+00:00
Less conspiratorial answer (better late than never):

Google services, integrity hardening:

From outside it might be difficult to understand the distinction, but Google is acting here as the owner and maintainer of a services ecosystem, which is the entire Google service-package provided to end-users. For them, Android is provided as a foundation for that package, and they increasingly experience difficulty to contain issues within that ecosystem and prevent them from spreading (piracy, malware, hacking,...).

The logical way out for them to contain those issues is to ensure that members of this ecosystem (=Devices with Google Services, Developers) are vetted more strongly.

Now Android has a history to be an open ecosystem, which allowed it to grow to the size it has now. But similar to the bootloader-unlock situation of device-vendors, the economic incentive of an "open ecosystem" keeps shrinking in comparison to the risks and issues it's causing Google in governing their services-ecosystem.

They obviously decided now that the price they have to pay for that "open ecosystem" (less control over the services ecosystem) is not justified anymore.

Now they have little room to move. In order to preserve that "open ecosystem", they would have to provide the user an option to disable Google Services entirely. But Google services are such a integral part of the OS-experience already that it which would turn the device almost into a completely separate product, different from the product the vendor initially built and the consumer initially purchased.

--

I don't expect this to be properly resolved for the sake of "pleasing the community". Products and Services are already so tightly combined in the Smartphone-space that it's hard for most to even understand what it is the user actually purchased when he bought the device.

Now Google the service provider starts to change the users' device in order to maintain his services, and there is no up-to-date definition to what degree they are actually allowed to do this.

How to change that: The underlying customer-protection framework is missing. A solution would be a general legally binding definition of what functions a customer owns if (and when) a device is stripped of any services on top.

If my car loses functions once it loses connection to the manufacturer, this bare set should be communicated as the purchased value ("in exchange for your money"), separately from any on-top ("in exchange for your data") business-model.

In theory this could create competition on the actual purchased value again, instead of continuing to offload the value from the device to some service provided by the vendor/service-provider...

But that's such a complex topic, the implications should be studied much deeper. Also, I don't expect political bodies to fully understand it for years to come, leave alone create a proper case to get the required voting and decision...
by svieira | 2025-09-16 12:34:33+00:00
Aren't hooks just composable effects implemented in userland? In fact, Sebastian actually asked the ECMAScript committee for effects a la OCaml 5.0 effects (https://ocaml.org/manual/5.0/effects.html) and React only built their own when the committee said "not right now", if I remember correctly.

The thing is ... you can model effects with the Free monad (or with Haskell's Backpack as was on here just the other day - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45221112), so they are definitely "functional", for most variations on the definition of "functional" that I know.
by woodruffw | 2025-09-16 12:34:54+00:00
Could you say more about what mitigations you’re thinking of?

I ask because think the directionality is backwards here: I’ve been involved in packaging ecosystem security for the last few years, and I’m generally of the opinion that PyPI has been ahead of the curve on implementing mitigations. Specifically, I think widespread trusted publishing adoption would have made this attack less effective since there would be fewer credentials to steal, but npm only implemented trusted publishing recently[1]. Crates also implemented exactly this kind of self-scoping, self-expiring credential exchange ahead of npm.

(This isn’t to malign any ecosystem; I think people are also overcorrect in treating this like a uniquely JavaScript-shaped problem.)

[1]: https://github.blog/changelog/2025-07-31-npm-trusted-publish...
by rerdavies | 2025-09-16 12:34:56+00:00
Android's Multiple Users feature does exactly this. Multiple users accounts with all user data completely sandboxed and restricted to each user. All user data is cryptographically protected on storage devices.

The actual SE filesystem available to a logged in user is pretty complicated. But the short story is that user-data is completely isolated. Presumably application binaries (which require digital signatures by default) are shared; although the "installed" state is not. Successive releases of Android have restricted access to any legacy "shared" data on the device (media folders particularly; pictures and video taken by the camera device have been strongly protected since Forever).

Verified checksums on a blockchain are only useful if they are verified by some provider who associates a blockchain ID with a real-world identity. Not sure what "blockchain" really adds. If anyone can create a blockchain ID, then "verification" doesn't really provide useful information.
by keepamovin | 2025-09-16 12:35:13+00:00
Lol this is what I said in 2015, and why I built my own frameworks that suited my own ergonomics. I wanted something that got out of the way and let me just build. React has so many hidden gotchas and weirdness, a lot of it due to its JS-but-not-quite and HTML-but-not-quite divergence from standard platform behavior.

The article talks about innovation in frameworks themselves, but the risk I foresaw was something larger and more pernicious: by being the "go to", but coming with hard to debug weirdness, plus dependency on an unreliable upstream, innovative products cost more to build - effectively slowing innovation across the space as a whole.

That's why I never picked React. Despite it having some good ideas, syntax and implementations!
by ElevenLathe | 2025-09-16 12:35:33+00:00
I think inequality is part of the story here too, even with restaurants generally. 60 years ago, it was reasonable to save some money at your union factory job to open a restaurant. If it didn't work out, you could go back to the plant and finish out your 30 years and retire with a full pension.

Now, I'm a top decile professional and would basically have to bet my whole net worth, including my retirement money, if I wanted to open a real restaurant. No wonder chain restaurants rule the day and the only thing interesting happening in food in most of the country are in food trucks. Ghost kitchens, at least a few years ago, seemed like a logical next step after the food truck: an even less capital-intensive way to get into the food service business.

The same forces will push someone who has this ambition to go the ghost kitchen route. Hopefully failing this way instead of with a fully staffed restaurant has saved at least one family from total ruin (downgraded instead to partial ruin).
by patwolf | 2025-09-16 12:35:34+00:00
IBM in the past has seemed more interested in maximizing the value of their current technologies than trying to predict and guide future technologies.

For example:

1. They missed the move to Cloud and eventually shifted focus to "hybrid" cloud, which allowed them to keep selling their existed software and hardware.

2. They missed the move to SaaS, trying instead to sell expensive on-prem enterprise software like Notes and Commerce, both of which they eventually sold to HCL.

3. Even though they were pioneers in virtualization, they were more interested in bundling their software on expensive appliances than enabling it to run in VMs.

The one thing they can predict is when something is on the verge of commoditization, at which point they decide it's too difficult to make money on and sell it off, e.g. PCs, laptops, hard drives, POS systems.
by poszlem | 2025-09-16 12:36:13+00:00
In my case, my “generalism” is mostly driven by ADHD, it happens when my brain gets bored with one subject. I don't think it's conscious in any way. I tend to go through phases: I’ll get into a topic, then switch to another, then another. After a few months, I circle back to the first subject, picking up where I left off (minus whatever I’ve forgotten). And the cycle repeats.
by daft_pink | 2025-09-16 12:36:15+00:00
Is it due process where we’d send someone to prison for life for this without any other evidence. No, it’s not.

Does it fall in with our existing perception of Facebook created by them railing against Apple’s privacy controls, even to the point where Apple shut down their account and they were locked out of their own offices, or how they approach privacy on other platforms or their overall activities regarding privacy for over a decade Fits their m.o. pretty well.
by Someone | 2025-09-16 12:36:15+00:00
> I count four different corner radius sizes currently on my screen, which is maddening.

I don’t see the mere fact of having multiple radiuses alone is a good criticism of the UI. If seeing multiple corner radiuses infuriates you, how do you survive in the real world? (https://www.folklore.org/Round_Rects_Are_Everywhere.html)

Or do you think it would look or work better with more consistency in corner radiuses? I would think radiuses look best when (somewhat) scaled to the dimensions of their rectangle (and that’s where, IMO, they may not be doing things the best way. For thin, long rectangles, I think the radius they chose is a tad too large, leaving barely any vertical straight lines)
by xandrius | 2025-09-16 12:36:38+00:00
Of course because you don't have access to the original data.

Imagine:

1. Film -> Method 1 -> Photo #1

2. Film -> Method 2 -> Photo #2

Instead you tried:

3. Photo #1 -> Method 3 -> Photo #2

Which instead gives you a badly edited Photo #1. You don't have the source code, so to speak.
by mooreds | 2025-09-16 12:36:53+00:00
I think the food trucks fulfill the idea behind ghost kitchens of an easy, low-risk way to start a food business. They also share some of the flexibility, because you do have the option to move locations.

But they have the additional benefit of a physical location so you can get profitable orders that you don't pay the UberEats tax on as well as build brand recognition.