MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by disgruntledphd2 | 2025-09-25 13:57:48+00:00
> In order to fire a German employee outside of their multiple month trial period they have to commit a crime or willfully ignore instructions, or the company must be in financial trouble due to outside circumstances. Underperforming is not a legal reason to fire somebody.

Do you have a source for this claim? I'm not an expert in German employment law but would love to learn more.
by jmull | 2025-09-25 13:57:52+00:00
I think a more fundamental and important aspect to this is developing a shared understanding of the design the change is ultimately intended to accomplish and the roadmap to achieving that.

Shared between the implementer and the reviewers, that is, which means design brainstorming, design formalization of some kind (writing the significant aspects down, or recording them in some other way), and a review process.

I should also say: this process doesn't have to be any larger or more heavy-weight than the change itself. And changes that don't have a design aspect can skip it entirely. But this article is talking about building a story with commits, and at that level you're almost surely talking about a significant design aspect.
by reactordev | 2025-09-25 13:58:00+00:00
They all wish they had the viewership for ads. They definitely were a thing all the way back to the first browsers. Banners, side banners, buttons, applets, most web advertising size standards are derivative of these initial placements.

What you’re talking about was geocities or aol’s members sites that anyone could build a site with. Anyone running CGI wishes for that sweet ad revenue to pay for the Sun servers…
by DonHopkins | 2025-09-25 13:58:19+00:00
I agree, it's gotten much much worse, especially with all the MAGA/Trump/Musk/Thiel boot licking.

It's prime time for Silicon Valley: AI Bubble. Instead of hiring the original actors or artists or writers, it could be ironically AI animated in the style of South Park, with a storyline about infringing on copyright and intellectual property, and putting actors and artists and programmers out of work.

I wonder what kind of company names would Erlich Bachman come up with on ketamine instead of shrooms?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OXqkkpnZDgU
by bob1029 | 2025-09-25 13:58:30+00:00
I see the primary value of a pull request being the simple awareness of what is being worked on. I aggressively sync my local changes to PRs that are marked draft in GitHub. Other developers I work with do the same. Throughout the day we asynchronously check in on the scope of the others' work. If there is something that looks like it might conflict, we call a meeting.

The actual code review phase for me is more about making sure the checkin is clean and that what I am intending to work on wont get caught up in a conflicting mess. The code review is NOT a recurring opportunity to purity test my teammates. Presumably, the reason they are working with us in the first place is because they already succeeded at this. "Trust but verify" is a fun trope if you are working somewhere the consequences of a mistake are one-way and measured in millions of dollars. However, a bad commit can be reverted in 10 seconds. Builds of software can be easily recreated. Deploying to production is still sensitive, but why get all weird about rapidly iterating through dev or QA environments?
by HermanMartinus | 2025-09-25 13:59:06+00:00
Creator of Bear here. Suggesting that because one project fails, others will too is a bit of a fallacy. Fact is that whether you self-host or not, you're still using someone else's platform (unless you're a real self-hoster with a box in your closet, in which case, good on you and godspeed).

I think as long as platforms have an easy way for people to backup and migrate, that's fair.

Additionally, part of the appeal of Bear is that I've made it my personal mission to get the platform to outlive me. Take that as you will. I can't prove that Bear will live on in perpetuity, but I can try my best.
by Phemist | 2025-09-25 13:59:50+00:00
Of course I don't expect these businesses to be charities, but I do expect them to uphold their side of the bargain.

The basic bargain of sportsbetting legalization is that sportsbooks are allowed to legally operate (retain a license) in this lucrative market if they 1) ensure taxes are paid, 2) the money involved is not flowing to bad actors (e.g. through match fixing and other methods of money laundry), 3) the sports themselves are not corrupted (imo an impossibility, but a different discussion) and 4) gamblers are taken care of properly (i.e. nudged away from self-destructive behaviours).

Point 1 is one of those unavoidable things like death. Point 2 is actually in line with their own incentives: match fixing directly hurts their bottom line by paying out on essentially highly mispriced odds. Point 3 is a much bigger discussion, which I feel they are already failing on (for me as a sports viewer with the incessant ads, but also in protecting the athletes that are not in the top 0.01% of any sports).

Point 4 however is something they are claiming they are doing, but in actuality it is complete reversed: the illegal sportsbetting market is, by all measures, out-growing the legal one. In the current environment, the major thing sportsbook legalization did is to provide a gateway drug for the illegal market. Limits and bans in order to (POSIWID) protect margins are the strongest nudges gamblers experience to move from legal to illegal sportsbooks.

> It's not a business where I would want to be involved.

Good :) The fewer competent individuals involved in any way, the harder it is for (owners of) sportsbooks to claim they are upholding their side of the bargain, as this will stand or fall with the competent execution of the AML/Match fixing & duty of care controls. Now to actively discourage others from working there as well...
by STKFLT | 2025-09-25 14:00:27+00:00
You can probably pretty easily just say Prime==Performance and Performance==Efficiency, but I think the "Prime" branding is kind of a carry over from Snapdragon mobile chips where they commonly use three tiers of core designs rather than the two. They still want to advertise the tier 2 cores as fast so T3 is efficiency, T2 is performance, T1 is Prime.

As an example, the Snapdragon 700-series had Prime, Gold, and Silver branding on it's cores.
by ge0rg | 2025-09-25 14:00:39+00:00
The other half of the problem is what to gain from a root shell. You can't influence the stages of the image processing without a PhD in Sony DSP Reverse Engineering, and so what remains is probably hooking into the camera controls and injecting key events to re-invent time-lapse timers or bulb exposures, and removing the 30min video recording limit.

This is where the NX mod project arrived - additional hooks into the camera controls and a few changes to internal registers left over by Samsung engineers for debugging, like silent shutter or the 30min limit.
by davedx | 2025-09-25 14:00:41+00:00
Unlike others, I like that it's Chromium because it means I get the devtools. Whenever I try to use other browsers I always get held back by how they work in other browsers, and I do a lot of front-end dev.

I'm posting this comment from Helium and so far, so good! I would honestly say ignore the naysayers, everything is a trade off, including which browser engine you put under the hood.
by disgruntledphd2 | 2025-09-25 14:00:48+00:00
> True. Operating a legitimate (!) clear business, say, in Singapore remotely from Ukraine was a routine thing like ten years ago and became almost impossible in 2020s - specifically due to American regulatory pressure. Again, we're talking about lawful businesses. Criminal enterprises have no problems opening bank accounts anywhere they want.

Can you give me some more details on this? My understanding was that only the sanctioned parts of Ukraine were impacted by recent changes, but perhaps I'm wrong.
by antongribok | 2025-09-25 14:01:32+00:00
While most of what you speak of re Ceph is correct, I want to strongly disagree with your view of not filling up Ceph above 66%. It really depends on implementation details. If you have 10 nodes, yeah then maybe that's a good rule of thumb. But if you're running 100 or 1000 nodes, there's no reason to waste so much raw capacity.

With upmap and balancer it is very easy to run a Ceph cluster where every single node/disk is within 1-1.5% of the average raw utilization of the cluster. Yes, you need room for failures, but on a large cluster it doesn't require much.

80% is definitely achievable, 85% should be as well on larger clusters.

Also re scale, depending on how small we're talking of course, but I'd rather have a small Ceph cluster with 5-10 tiny nodes than a single Linux server with LVM if I care about uptime. It makes scheduled maintenances much easier, also a disk failure on a regular server means RAID group (or ZFS/btrfs?) rebuild. With Ceph, even at fairly modest scale you can have very fast recovery times.

Source, I've been running production workloads on Ceph at fortune-50 companies for more than a decade, and yes I'm biased towards Ceph.
by jghn | 2025-09-25 14:02:01+00:00
This. I have colleagues who helpfully break things into small PRs, but more often than not I wish they hadn’t. I usually want to review things in context of the big picture and that gets lost.

Usually what I do is check out their last PR, figure out what I want to say, and then identify the appropriate place to leave a comment in their stack of PRs. Which is a lot more work for me. And this assumes that they’ve even finished all their PRs instead of expecting them to merge in one at a time
by codyb | 2025-09-25 14:02:20+00:00
Did you think your company wasn't top down?

The American model of hierarchical with input which combines the top down structure of many societies with the flatter get input until agreement model of others has been pretty effective all in all.

I think shareholders get a say (in private companies that's the owner), you get a salary and benefits (maybe some shares giving you some say) (and hopefully some workers protections and unionization opportunities) and the issue right now is that the wealthy control a staggering number of the shares giving them huge, outsized impacts on regular people's lives.
by manoDev | 2025-09-25 14:03:29+00:00
Code review is a good way to ensure 1) the team has context 2) double-check the approach taken 3) keep conceptual integrity high. For that, you should make atomic PRs (not focus on minimal LoC, but rather a coherent patch set for a feature/bugfix), agree with your team that reviewing code is work and set appropriate time aside for it.

Also, code review should be ego free: 1) criticize the code, not the author 2) don’t be too attached to code written, the objective is the product and not number of LoC contributed 3) it’s okay to start from scratch after learning about a better approach, or even make more than one and compare approaches.

Where most teams fail is treating it as a gatekeeping process rather than context sharing, make PRs too small to be meaningful or only waste time arguing about code style and other minutiae.
by reneberlin | 2025-09-25 14:03:38+00:00
I also see many people complaining about non-determinism, mainly from products like ChatGPT, that they have no control over many parts (system-prompt, llm, ...) and the most interesting in this case: SEED-value.

If you are on the same hardware and run your model with the same seed-value, and the same prompt: the output should be deterministic for the most architectures and models we talk about.

What i meant is, that most people don't even know if they are using a seed-value or not in their chatbot. And having no seed-value set, or having the seed-value set to another value on purpose by the provider makes the whole reception understandable.
by glenstein | 2025-09-25 14:03:55+00:00
It's barely begun to get off the ground and it's by no means solved the issue of antibiotic resistance, but it's a cause for hope. There's other grounds for excitement too, like deriving new antibiotics from naturally occurring microbes (its how the originals were found but then we rode those coattails for decades without searching for new ones). Also phage therapy, CRISPR based strategies, and microbiome management.

Not solved, but it makes antibiotic resistance look more like our generations Killer Bees.
by FuriouslyAdrift | 2025-09-25 14:04:04+00:00
It's like the nostalgia about the "Summer of Love" and the 1960's... it really only lasted a single summer and only in one or two little areas.

Same thing with the "old web." It was about the very early 90s before Netscape Navigator (the Mosaic days) and when everyone was just throwing up a single HTML page with a bunch of links... that's the "old web".

The modern WWW kicked off with the ability to make credit card transactions online (1994). That... and porn (1995).

For "old web" sites that still exist, check out wiby

https://wiby.org/
by bell-cot | 2025-09-25 14:05:53+00:00
The "yet another mortal security flaw in Cisco..." stories never seem to end.

Daydream: Journalists start ending such articles with "This is the Nth critical security flaw for Cisco in just the past year. Network security professionals we spoke to agree that network equipment vendors X, Y, and Z all have far better track records than Cisco."
by maxrecursion | 2025-09-25 14:05:56+00:00
There are amazing retro games that are still awesome to play to this day. To say they all suck, and it's just nostalgia is not true at all.

Sure, a lot of them suck, especially on Nintendo 64, because of the 3d transition, but from the NES onward there are timeless classics.

My kid beat super Metroid several times, he decided to play it on his own on his switch, and he loved it. He plays the old pokemon games too. In other words, that's a terrible analogy.
by DonHopkins | 2025-09-25 14:06:17+00:00
>extreme resilience

You misspelled narcissistic psychopath.

The Best of Gavin Belson:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=30WTWkFe910

The Best of Russ Hanneman:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wGy5SGTuAGI
by derbOac | 2025-09-25 14:06:40+00:00
My impression is a lot of US health care problems are caused in part by a sort of unholy combination of restricted competition and access, together with profit driven market participants. So you end up with this marketplace constricted by overregulation — some well-meaning but often basically occurring because of protectionist moats and regulatory capture — increasingly controlled by profiteers trying to extract as much money as possible, with patients at the bottom, providers in the middle, and executives at the top. I think the problems with monopolies in the US are broad in scope but it hits healthcare especially hard because of how grotesquely distorted it is.

I'm not surprised by this finding, although I find in economics and healthcare forums the results tend to be misused (at least in my opinion), because it gets used to argue against any deregulation or cost cutting, instead of cost cutting of the type that tends to happen for the benefit of investors and shareholders, rather than cost cutting of the type that increases healthcare options and access.
by wslh | 2025-09-25 14:06:43+00:00
This. I'd also add that, in general, you don't need a large sum of money in the early stages, as long as your basic needs are covered. For instance, living with your parents for a while can be a smart move. More importantly, use time wisely: with discipline you can do or validate a lot over several quarters. By contrast, if you take the VC route, the metronome ticks much faster, often in a way that can be counterproductive for your startup. As unintuitive as it sounds.
by gjsman-1000 | 2025-09-25 14:06:45+00:00
You're choosing the top 10 games on the Nintendo 64 and NES to make your analogy; out of the thousands and thousands of games produced for those systems. Give your kid game #50 (Waialae Country Club: True Golf Classics on N64) and see if she would prefer it over literally any modern game that ranks on Steam. My analogy holds.
by HankStallone | 2025-09-25 14:07:29+00:00
Some people, yes. Go on a dating subreddit and ask where to meet people, and a lot of them will say "on the apps," and that they don't want to be bothered on the occasions when they go out in public.

That's the always-online contingent, though. In real life, a lot of people still go out and would be glad to be chatted up in person. By someone they find attractive, of course, but that's always been the case. If you do it today, one advantage is that you stand out, since so many are afraid to do it.
by corytheboyd | 2025-09-25 14:07:41+00:00
> In my opinion the answer is honestly pretty simple: blogs and RSS feeds.

This point is made very often, and I do believe it was true for many people, but I honestly didn’t care about individual blogs at all when I was a young net user.

I didn’t care about the 1,000 words a single person wrote about their trip abroad. There was no way to interact with it? All the action for me was on forums and chat rooms. Like the author mentions, it’s exactly the type of excitement that naturally led to early social media, which I was also a huge fan of for the close friends I already had.

The defeatist in me feels like I will just never have that same feeling again online. In part because I am no longer a child, in part because there are just too many people online now, in part because too many of those people’s brains are twitter-rotted.

It’s fine, I have my close circles to keep my human social spirit alive.
by gus_massa | 2025-09-25 14:08:42+00:00
I was initially surprised too, but I think there is a some trick...

I'm not sure what happens on paper, but when you have ink disolved in water the abortion is not linearly proportional to the concentration, it's exponential. For example, consider a red ink and 5 magical selected frequencies and the absortions at 1% of concentration are: 99%, 99%, 50%, 10%, 1%

If you double the ink at 2% you get 99.99%, 99.99%, 75%, 19%, 1.99%

So increasing or decreasing the ink concentration may give you information of different frequencies, even with only one ink and only one sensor. In this case mostly about the 3rd and 4th. With more concentration you may kill all the light in the 3rd and measure the absortions ratio between the 4th and the 5th.

One problem I see here is how to order them, but I guess it's possible with a few sensors and a few inks. Each sensor sees all the frequencies, but with different weight. I'm not sure if it's possible to solve this, but perhaps you need some initial approximated model of the inks(???).

Now, when you put the inks on paper and have a unreliable light source and perhaps other technical problems, ...

In conclusion, I think it's possible to use different saturation and mixes of the inks to get different spectral distribution of the light that bounce on the card. Then use the three sensors to get three averages and try to use big linear algebra book to reconstruct what happens in between. But I should read the paper to be sure.
by bayindirh | 2025-09-25 14:09:01+00:00
Sony's full frame machines are so customizable out of the box already, so you don't need anything to begin with, at least for normal photography needs. Maybe focus stacking, but it's a pure new procedure.

30 minute recording limit is already lifted and advanced time-lapse is introduced alongside mammal eye tracking with a firmware update by Sony, and you can customize anything sans preliminary image processing steps, and by customization I mean the parameters of the algorithms or algorithms themselves.

Moreover, Sony's full-frame systems are already distributed systems to begin with. There are at least two DSPs running asynchronously during focus and image capture, so there may be no pathways to influence the DSPs significantly after they boot up, even.

Personally I wouldn't muck with a system designed to do image processing 30FPS even before taking a photo (A7-III) incl. face and eye tracking and focus correction without any hiccups to this day.

From what I understood, these cameras perform a nigh impossible dance within the limits of their hardware to maximize speed and reduce energy consumption. Who am I to disrespect them for doing that. Instead, I prefer to use the thing and get nice photos out of it.
by Workaccount2 | 2025-09-25 14:09:59+00:00
>purpose is to return cash to shareholders in the near term.

I see this constantly repeated in anti-capitalist/anti-corporate rhetoric, but on the other side, shareholder meetings, finance conferences, financial service talks, no one ever wants this. Maybe the 20 year old stock bros on discord pumping penny stocks, but no serious shareholder of any company with a name you might recognize.

It happens, there are cases of it, but overwhelmingly the vibe is "long term stable profit generation".
by jwr | 2025-09-25 14:10:02+00:00
I am all for resurrecting the Old Web, but please, let's not repeat the same mistakes again.

Be independent. Running your own website is not that difficult. And seriously, spending the minuscule amount of money on hosting should not be a problem. It's a hobby, hobbies cost money. If you own your website, you can move it anywhere quickly. Nobody will start showing ads. Nobody will pester your users with annoying "SUBSCRIBE" modal popups. Nobody will sell the platform along with you and your content to a new owner.

I do not know enough about this particular platform — maybe it's different from others, maybe not. But I have seen enough platforms undergo progressive enshittification to be wary of any place that wants to host my stuff under their domain/URL.
by nostrademons | 2025-09-25 14:10:09+00:00
And this was a co-op preschool, which is a special variety of private preschool (usually non-profit) where the parents are usually involved in classes with the kids and much of the maintenance of the school itself is handled through volunteerism of member families.

My wife served as treasurer for the penultimate year, saw the writing on the wall, and then turned the position over to someone else to actually wind down the school. The model just doesn't work where we live: it requires a large number of single-income families so that one parent can be full-time involved in the kids' upbringing, and housing prices are such that single-income families cannot afford homes in the area. As a result, their market just evaporated. People just can't do it anymore.
by bdcravens | 2025-09-25 14:11:11+00:00
I realize this will come off as snide, and result in downvotes, but looking to the success of Ruby and Rails today, the "community" is as much the money that's been poured into the ecosystem as it is the warm fuzzies and volunteers. Without the millions of dollars companies like Heroku, Shopify, Basecamp, Github, 37 Signals, and others have spent in terms of money and developer-hours, the projects we know and love would be in a much different place. To that end, those entities are as much the "community" as the developer who has done nothing but "gem install" and put cute stickers on their laptop.
by jfengel | 2025-09-25 14:11:33+00:00
Well, that staves off the technical recession for another half-year.

It does point out the difference between the technical recession indicators and what people feel. We had similar results a year ago, and the incumbent government was destroyed for it.

Unfortunately measuring that "what people feel" component is really hard. It often presages a technical recession, but like all economic indicators it has predicted 17 of the last 4 recessions.
by cjbenedikt | 2025-09-25 14:11:34+00:00
So far they have backtested on historical data. Now they will have to test it going forward in an identical setup to verify historical results were not "curve fitted". Also market scenarios change. The period used for backtesting (9/23 to 10/24) wasn't particularly challenging. But they put all that into their caveat. Not sure that answers your question.