MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by Lammy | 2025-10-20 03:18:23+00:00
> you could say they were unhinged

> GPU makers have all abandoned this practice, which is a shame as it provided something different through box art alone. Now, we're drowning in bland boxes and similar-looking graphics cards

I feel like there could be a more positive adjective than “unhinged” if you're going to turn around and praise it. OED sez “wildly irrational and out of touch with reality”. How about “whimsical”? I love this stuff and think we need to bring this kind of whimsy back to computing.

> There's a scantily dressed lady in armor

Author neglects to mention that ATi/AMD had a named ongoing marketing character for many many years — Ruby!

- Agent Ruby Demo Compilation https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sUAuj0Jn8UI

- 2008 Ruby demo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YjXCae4Gu0

- Ruby origin story https://web.archive.org/web/20071023192128/http://game.amd.c...

- ATI Agent Ruby™ Usage Guidelines 1.0 http://www.barbaraburch.com/portfolio/whitepaper6.pdf

- She even stuck around long enough for the ATi name to entirely disappear from AMD Radeon branding: https://i.imgur.com/uBWfzCA.jpeg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwIMHX7rW8Q (2013)

- AMD-exclusive Ruby skin for Quake Champions https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-LRSqC9n0Tc (2017)

> GeForce 6600 GT was enclosed inside a box featuring a lovely lady

nᴠɪᴅɪᴀ had several named demo characters too, but they removed all the pretty lady ones some time in 2020. Compare:

- https://web.archive.org/web/20200921115422/https://www.nvidi...

- https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/community/demos/

Adam Sessler voice I give this article a two… out of five.
by squirtle24 | 2025-10-20 03:18:36+00:00
Edit: I take that back. Another photo has emerged showing more blood.

https://www.reddit.com/r/ThatLookedExpensive/comments/1oalnx...

--

None of the articles I have seen have said the lacerations are a result of the "space debris" incident. The linked article simply says "One of the photos shows a pilot’s arm peppered with small cuts and scratches", and which is not the same as "the pilot said the shattering glass caused the cuts you see on his arm."

I am saying it is possible that the pilot had a previous, unrelated injury, and it just so happened to be captured in the picture of the windshield. That picture is going viral because it was likely one of the first pics from the incident, but it does not mean his injuries are necessarily from the incident. I was only pointing this out based on the way the blood looked more dried up and treated/healing.
by Nevermark | 2025-10-20 03:19:12+00:00
That is a very good point.

Two mitigations would be gradual adjustments, and a willingness to delay reductions a bit.

People shouldn't be sweating bullets about help being pulled prematurely as a direct result of trying to get past the need for it. Or have the marginal impact of increasing their earned income actually reduce total help+income.

I know somebody in an extremely bad health situation, and dealing with both of those perverse issues. Attempting employment would carry a lot risk. And with kids to be cared for, playing roulette in an already challenging situation is a real barrier. (In this case, it isn't government help, but a situation with similar logic.)
by nobody9999 | 2025-10-20 03:19:37+00:00
>When executive demands something of private citizens and private entities, it means they are bossing over said people/entities. Nobody elected the executive to boss over people. When Congress attempts to set these same regulations, these entities get a chance to reach out to their reps and ask for changes. When Congress sets regulations, power is dispersed among 400+ reps.

IMHO it's much simpler than that. Congress has the power of the purse -- that is to say that Congress decides what funds are disbursed by the Federal government.

While there is a small measure of flexibility for the Executive on when and/or how those funds are disbursed, the Constitution vests budgetary power (i.e., who gets funded, how much to they get, and for what purpose) in Congress and not the Executive.

The same goes for tariffs too.

Congress is not doing their job. Not only in the sense that they've abandoned the "power of the purse" to the Executive, but also in that legislators, for the most part, represent their big donors rather than their constituents.

Which isn't new, although it's pretty stark right now. With the dysfunction so high that the government is currently unfunded.

Even more, the House won't even gavel into session, as they'd then have to swear in a newly elected member of Congress which would give members just enough votes to passing a motion to publish information (The so-called "Epstein Files") widely believed to be bad news for the President as well as others in the power structure.

The Senate isn't negotiating, nor is the House drafting actual budget bill(s) which is one of their primary responsibilities.

So yes. If there's an issue with Federal research funding, it's Congress that needs to fix it. What the Executive is trying to do is not part of the powers given to them by the Constitution (you know, the *supreme law of the land) and, as such, isn't lawful.
by jll29 | 2025-10-20 03:21:43+00:00
> One really important factor is the grading curve, if used.

I never use it to grade, because it is empirically unfair.

The further you move in the educational system, the less people's aptitute matches a Gaussian or "normal" distribution.

(I also often fought a lot with management and HR when I was a manager in industry, as my team was hardly statistically normal (100% Ph.D.s from top places) imposing a Gaussian for bonus payments on a strongly left-skewed distribution is unfair. Microsoft introduced this and got into legal trouble, and many companies followed late and didn't realize the legal trouble part.)
by learningstone | 2025-10-20 03:22:32+00:00
Great question — and fair point!

Yes, the frontend was actually generated with the help of AI. I used an AI code assistant to scaffold the initial React + Vite structure and component layout, then refined and customized it manually to make it production-ready.

I wanted to explore how far current AI tools can go in building functional, aesthetic UIs — and where human input is still essential. ColorMinds is kind of an experiment in that sense: AI-assisted creation, but human-curated output.

Regarding the images — they’re all AI-generated from original prompts (no scraping or reuse of copyrighted material). We also filter out prompts that could resemble well-known IPs like Nintendo or Disney to stay on the safe side.

Appreciate you raising both points
by saghm | 2025-10-20 03:25:06+00:00
I don't think "power" is really that helpful a metric in determining how useful a programming language is. If you think of programming from the standpoint of trying to specify the program you want out of all of the possibly programs you could write, one of the most helpful things a programming language can do is eliminate programs that you don't want by making them impossible to write. From that standpoint, constraints are a feature, not a drawback.
by aspenmayer | 2025-10-20 03:27:33+00:00
> An AI accusation on top of not grasping that the point OP made was about population-level patterns.

If you reread what I wrote, I didn’t say you were AI or using it, or not, but merely bringing to your and the other readers’ attention that your formatting wasn’t the norm for many folks who post on this site, whereas it is the norm for many AI-generated outputs.

That the conclusion you draw is one of being a victim of a false accusation, when none was laid at your feet? “A guilty conscience needs no accuser,” so they say.

> I don't think it is productive for me to continue this conversation.

On this point, I am full agreement. Apologies if I have upset you or wasted your time. I found your points well-reasoned but a diversion to what was supposedly already beside the point, so I will only say that two wrongs don’t make a right, but three lefts do. All roads lead to Rome, and we got there together in the end.
by itake | 2025-10-20 03:30:40+00:00
I don't mind people using AI to assist with writing, but when I see the markers of ai assistance, I wonder if the author actually reviewed what the AI wrote(hallucinated?) before publishing the article.

Also the ChatGPT writing style in this piece is really annoying to read.

---

> Author’s Note: What follows is entirely my own opinion

is it? ChatGPT wrote most of it...

---

> they import 30% of soybeans from us

I thought they stopped importing soybeans from the USA?

> Some legacy manufacturing

Where does the author think iPhones, automotive parts, computer / IT equipment, medical devices, machinery tools, are made?

---

If the author is here, can they talk about Trump's TACO strategy? Its one thing to say Trump is just doing a chaos monkey, but if he always pulls back on his promises, then Trump is being consistent, not unreliable.
by alganet | 2025-10-20 03:30:41+00:00
I don't think China wants to fight.

What would Trump be without an enemy? I think that's the question we need to answer here. Can he thrive in a world in peace? I have difficulty imagining what he would do.

I would go even further: most countries in the world right now don't need an enemy. There is just a few of them that are defined by persistent war.
by samdoesnothing | 2025-10-20 03:30:45+00:00
Hmm, let me explain and then you can be the judge of that.

All rights that a person possesses implies obligations that everyone else must meet. For example, if I have the right to not be assaulted, that implies the obligation of others to not assault me. The difference between a negative and positive right is that the obligation for a negative right is inaction, but for a positive right it's action.

If you're forced to act in a specific way, you're robbed of your agency and ownership of yourself. What else would you call that?
by rpcope1 | 2025-10-20 03:32:38+00:00
I worked at a place that had a big Forth codebase that was doing something mission critical. It was really neat and cool once you finally got it, and probably hundreds or maybe thousands of people had touched it, worked on it and learned it, but the ramp was pretty brutal for your average developer and thus someone decided it would be better to build the same thing over with a shitty almost-C-but-not-quite interpreted language. It certainly made it easier for more people to understand and build, even if the solution was less elegant.
by pols45 | 2025-10-20 03:33:04+00:00
To realize how hard educating anyone is, pick 10 kids or adults and come up with a system of learning that enables all of them to flourish. Not just some of them.

What youtube educators don't get is every time a student suffers a setback some one has to take responsibility and sit there with them till they get over the obstacle. Views and Likes don't provide that signal of how many are lost or stuck.

Books and Libraries have existed long before Edu systems or Youtubers emerged, but kids and adults can easily get lost in that jungle if they don't have a feedback loop for guidance and support system when they stumble. Design of that system can be co-opted by Commercial and Political interests. Power corrupts all systems. But then there is always a counter reaction to pull the system back. Boundaries and balance emerge. It's a long slow process.

People maybe frustrated about how long it takes for trees to grow, but whether they are interested in designing a botanical garden or a healthy forest a good sign they will fail is when frustration starts turning into resentment.

The only way to prevent that happening is to stay humble at how complex it all is. Go into the garden. Get your hands dirty. Get one plant to flourish.
by hilbert42 | 2025-10-20 03:34:14+00:00
"If I could pay $20 extra dollars for a piece of clothing with a twice as durable zipper I’d do it."

Agreed, the biggest issue is durability, like you I've had many broken zippers which often seem to break at the most inconvenient time, embarrassing experiences such as having to secure my fly with bent paperclips pushed through the fabric come to mind.

But I think there's more to it than just durability as there are some basic design issues that are hard to overcome. For instance, if a tooth gets pulled out or it does not mesh properly with its opposite mate then all will unravel (and that happens surprising often). It only takes one missing tooth or the first teeth to be not properly anchored for the whole zipper to fail. Cascading failures don't happen with buttons (one missing isn't much of a problem).
by goku12 | 2025-10-20 03:35:01+00:00
May I remind that the real bad news is that Chrome will keep third party cookies around, used primarily for cross-site tracking. The deceivingly named 'Privacy Sandbox' was only marginally better than alternative tracking methods like third party cookies and browser fingerprinting. While it provided some level of anonymity to the users compared to the latter two, it has been argued that tracking individual users is still possible with its hotly contested components like FLoC. This is important because Firefox's and Safari's solution was to not provide any alternatives at all. That's still an option for Chrome, but one that they're not going to take at all, as evidenced by their blog post.

They don't consider the users' interests at all in this matter. And I find the framing of the loss of Privacy Sandbox as some sort of disaster to be deceptive and troubling. "Too bad PS is gone, because now you'll have to deal with 3rd party cookies" doesn't make a good case for PS.
by rpcope1 | 2025-10-20 03:36:42+00:00
If you like Forth, but find it challenging to build real stuff with, Factor (https://factorcode.org/) is most or all of the good stuff about Forth designed in a way that's much easier to do things with. It was designed by Slava Pestov (who I think had a big hand in Swift), and honestly it's a lot of fun to build webapps and other programs with, and much less brutal to read than Forth can be.
by marshfram | 2025-10-20 03:38:18+00:00
You're wasting your time wasting my time if you pretend you can't find the it in that sentence, one my 14 year old freshman son identified in 2 seconds. That means you're either a moron, or you play very stupid games.

That language is deception primarily can be factual along with 99% of its users remaining unable to detect that deception, and it's not even fully contradictory. What kind of scientist can't hold near contradictory processes in their working memory to reach correlational theoretic statements, certainly none that I know.

If you don't know the animal world of signals heavily discounts arbitrary forms from roles in survival, I don't know what to tell you. Go back to undergrad and start all over again.

The amount of work about language being too indirect to be valid, stable signals and thus deceptive is rather vast, and you pretending it will vanish with that little narrative shuffle "peoplw will ignore it" means you must be either doubly moronic, have no idea about the human capacity for self-deception in signals, mythological thought, or spend your days playing defensive games in debates you just can't win.

I count over 300 papers discussing the deceptive nature of language, beginning with Aristotle.

..at some point a direct contact must occur between knowledge and reality. If we succeed in freeing ourselves from all these interpretations – if we above all succeed in removing the veil of words, which conceals the truth, the true essence of things, then at one stroke we shall find ourselves face to face with the original perceptions.. Ernst Cassirer The Philosophy of Symbolic Forms
by jll29 | 2025-10-20 03:38:29+00:00
> ... should be offered by universities.

Yes, but remember the onus is on the student to figure out how they learn best. Tertiary education is no longer about spoon-feeding (adult) students everything.

Since the parent mentioned a book, here is the reference, and also two related Wikipedia pages regarding how to learn effectively:

The Art of Doing Science and Engineering: Learning to Learn, Gordon and Breach, 1997. https://www.amazon.com/-/en/Art-Doing-Science-Engineering-Le...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spaced_repetition

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leitner_system
by est | 2025-10-20 03:39:43+00:00
> No equivalent to Windows/Office for enterprise (yet)

Chinese govn't has been using Linux based OS exclusively with WPS Office[1] (co-founded by Xiaomi's Leijun in the 90s)

Private sector use Win+Office though. But tech companies all choose Web based office like Feishu. docx/xlsx/pptx were just for compatibility only and interop with customers. Windows was like a Browser launcher anyway.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WPS_Office
by insane_dreamer | 2025-10-20 03:40:25+00:00
> Most services jobs are much nicer (and require far less manual labor) than those in agriculture.

We tell ourselves that because none of us have ever done agriculture. But I'm not so sure that it's true. Yes, far less manual labor. But manual labor isn't a bad thing.

Technology has made our lives _easier_, no question about it. It could also make our lives _better_, but I'm not sure that it is anymore (I feel like the curve has flattened, except for the few who are reaping nearly all the benefits of increased technological "progress").
by echelon | 2025-10-20 03:41:12+00:00
This is incredible news!

I never thought this would happen, or that if it did, we'd be a few generations behind.

Now let's onshore or friendshore everything else we need! Rare earths, mid-tier processors, chemical precursors, pharmaceuticals, steel, robotics/mechatronics, solar, drones, ...

Why even stop there? Kill the Jones Act, get back to building naval drones and ships of all kinds, ...
by fake-name | 2025-10-20 03:42:37+00:00
Author is a quack. There is deliberate mis-quoting in the article that completely warps the source material.

From their quoted section:

> We shall not try to make these people or any of their children into philosophers or men of learning or of science. We are not to raise up from among them authors, orators, poets, or men of letters. We shall not search for embr}-o great artists, painters, musicians. Nor will we cherish even the humbler ambition to raise up from among them lawyers, doctors, preachers, politicians, statesmen, of whom we now have ample supply.

And then the removed section, which effectively negates the (facial) point of the previous statement:

> We are to follow the admonitions of the good apostle, who said, ''Mind not high things, but condescend to men of low degree." And generally, with respect to these high things, all that we shall try to do is just to create presently about these country homes an atmosphere and conditions such, that, if by chance a child of genius should spring up from the soil, that genius will surely bud and not be blighted.

This is a really, REALLY common quote (with the latter part deliberately omitted) in lots of places complaining about the way the US education system works, as well as antigovernment movement people.

I certainly will not claim the US education system isn't broken, but using such a deliberate, malicious out-of-context quote casts a pall over anything else the author has to say, particularly given it's long, storied history in antigovernment propaganda.
by Sytten | 2025-10-20 03:44:25+00:00
That guy is taking a couple of data points and running with them. The US could not AT ALL freeze 2.5T of Chinese assets without major consequences. They froze 300B of russian assets and all other central banks are running away from the dollar. The share of reserve currency in USD is now at its lowest in many decades at 40% and gold is soaring.
by Avicebron | 2025-10-20 03:44:39+00:00
"In our dream, we have limitless resources, and the people yield themselves with perfect docility to our molding hand. The present educational conventions fade from our minds; and, unhampered by tradition, we work our own good will upon a grateful and responsive rural folk. We shall not try to make these people or any of their children into philosophers or men of learning or of science. We are not to raise up from among them authors, orators, poets, or men of letters. We shall not search for embryo great artists, painters, musicians. Nor will we cherish even the humbler ambition to raise up from among them lawyers, doctors, preachers, politicians, statesmen, of whom we now have ample supply." - Frederick T. Gates (The Country School of To-Morrow)
by rpcope1 | 2025-10-20 03:44:45+00:00
I loved the weird boxes back in the 90s and 2000s. I remember dad would always take us to computer trade shows and ham events, and occasionally you'd see someone from ATi or Nvidia (or one of the integrators) demoing their wares with all sorts of bizarre and funny demo software and renders. I don't know if it was just me or what, but they always sent real nice sales or marketing people and it was fun to talk to them about the GPUs as a kid. I think they were as mystified (I recall several of them laughing about it) about the box art as everyone else was.
by troad | 2025-10-20 03:44:49+00:00
This is a wild take. It's one thing to criticise the BEAM for things it's bad at, it's another to criticise it for the thing it absolutely excels at.

The BEAM is built around passing immutable messages between cheap green threads, watched over by resilient supervisor trees. This means no data races (immutability), no hung threads (supervisor trees), no boilerplate (all of this is built in). The performance is surprisingly good, since mandatory immutability permits reference-based optimisations (copying, passing, etc).

The BEAM is, in fact, the perfect platform for the exact use case you describe - fault-tolerant, distributed/concurrent systems.
by insane_dreamer | 2025-10-20 03:45:03+00:00
> So the problem isn't robots, it's the structure of how we humans rely on jobs for income.

Humans have depended on their own labor for income since we stopped being hunters and gatherers or living in small tribes.

So it's not just a matter of "the gov will find a way", but it's basically destroying the way humanity as a whole has operated for the past 5000 years.

So yes, it's a huge problem. Everything done under the banner of "innovation" isn't necessarily a good thing. Slavery was pretty "innovative" as well, for those who were the slave owners.
by tombert | 2025-10-20 03:45:06+00:00
Forth has been a peripheral fascination of mine for about a decade, just because it seems to do well at nearly every level of the software stack. Like a part of me wants to build a kernel with it, or make a web server, or anything in between.

I've never actually done any Forth, though, just because it's a bit arcane compared to the C-inspired stuff that took over.
by snowwrestler | 2025-10-20 03:45:33+00:00
Nitpicking here, but this is not a submarine article. This is above the waves, straight-ahead, overt PR.

It’s a standard product launch article. The news is: Company Announced Product. The article is: what the company says about the product. There’s not much more to report than that, yet. Once the product actually hits shelves there can be more articles with real world tests, breakdowns, close-ups, etc.

The reality is that YKK does not actually know if the new zipper will cause more tears, snag easier, be harder to repair, etc. No one will know until the product actually comes into extended contact with the real world.
by tredre3 | 2025-10-20 03:47:17+00:00
> There are a million laws on the books that not only are not enforced, but aren't even self consistent with each other. It is enforcement that determines what one actually can or can't do.

Okay but your statement was that there's "nothing illegal about it". You now agree that it's illegal, you're just unlikely to get caught. And if you are, you'll just lose that purchase and not face any legal consequences.