MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by incomingpain | 2025-10-09 13:20:13+00:00
When you run a business, you can’t realistically perform background checks on every partner or contributor. Many people will have said or believed evil things. If a company starts politically vetting everyone it interacts with, it risks alienating large parts of society and undermining its mission. The best thing you can do is have dialogue with those people; not cancel them.

It also seems like some of the criticism here reflects a very local Canadian political outlook being applied globally. That rarely works because the world’s values and politics differ widely, and enforcing one region’s standards everywhere just drives division and more polarization.

For instance, even within Canada, provinces have very different approaches to religion and immigration, and not all of them align neatly with international norms. These are complex issues, not simple moral tests. Quebec has restrictions on religious symbols in the public sector targetting muslims, prayer in public targeting muslims, and limits on legal immigration(you guessed it, targetting muslims). So it’s hard to take moral absolutism seriously when local politics themselves are complicated.

DHH's public views do overlap with Reform UK’s platform, which (if you believe polls) has substantial voter support right now. Whether one agrees or not, that makes them part of mainstream democratic debate, not fringe extremism. With the recent exodus of MPs from Conservatives to Reform, I would be shocked if they dont win.

I think Framework’s response handled this great. Focusing on open collaboration rather than ideological purity tests.
by btbuildem | 2025-10-09 13:20:18+00:00
I am still of the conviction that "reducing employee head count" with AI should start at the top of the org chart. The current iterations of AI already talk like the C-suites, and deliver approximately same value. It would provide additional benefits, in that AIs refuse to do unethical things and generally reason acceptably well. The cost cutting would be immense!

I am not kidding. In any large corps, the decision makers refuse to take any risks, show no creativity, move as a flock with other orgs, and stay middle-of-the-road, boring, beige khaki. The current AIs are perfect for this.
by lesuorac | 2025-10-09 13:20:50+00:00
But why?

If this went the other way where say FaceBook let people freely create accounts and talk to everybody and then later on either charged 10$/month, plastered the site with ads, or started to selling user data people would be upset about a bait and switch.

If you release something for free as you shouldn't be expected compensation for it. People also shouldn't expect anything beyond the terms that you've released it underneath as well.
by potato3732842 | 2025-10-09 13:20:56+00:00
>The algorithm (if followed) does not produce collisions. Pedestrians have the priority,

Yes, in magical textbook land sure. In reality there are signaled crosswalks and most pedestrians abide by them so it's not clear if any given pedestrian wants to cross at that time and the pedestrian is also looking for traffic coming from the right if they're crossing against the signal (perfectly legal, but ill advised in the face of social norms) it's a recipe for confusion. Multiply by a nation of hundreds of millions and you get a lot of near misses and accidents.

>It's only a problem if we let drivers get away with making it a problem. The inherent asymmetry in the driver-pedestrian relationship must be taken into account by the law and road design.

I propose a 3 step solution to this "problem":

1)ignore anyone who talks like that from any side of the issue because they're probably gonna make it worse and not better and piss everyone off in the process and make the problem harder to solve.

2) Slap up "no right on red" signs and adjust signals accordingly

3) Measure results and address gaps.
by rsynnott | 2025-10-09 13:21:01+00:00
> In the comments here you'll see people saying that European roads are much better suited for pedestrians. If you ask me that is definitely not the case in e.g. Spain.

Having been in both Spain (a few regions) and the US, Spanish roads (at least what I saw of them) are immeasurably better for pedestrians than US ones.

> The tendency to compare the US to Europe in the comments here baffles me

Context is that the US is a huge outlier in road deaths. No European country comes close.
by itake | 2025-10-09 13:21:17+00:00
The incentive structure for managers (and literally everyone up the chain) is to maximize headcount. More people you managed, the more power you have within the organization.

No one wants to say on their resume, "I manage 5 people, but trust me, with AI, its like managing 20 people!"

Managers also don't pay people's salaries. The Tech Tools budget is a different budget than People salaries.

Also keep in mind, for any problem space, there is an unlimited number of things to do. 20 people working 20% more efficiently wont reach infinity any faster than 10 people.
by CalRobert | 2025-10-09 13:21:27+00:00
FTA:

""" The strongest evidence seems to be for the “Big SUV hypothesis” — it’s hard to see what else could be causing the increase in deadliness of pedestrian accidents, and not cause a similar increase in other things. The Big SUV hypothesis also seems like something that could be limited to the US. But this on its own isn’t completely satisfying: if its big SUVs, why are pedestrian deaths for sedans increasing too? Why aren’t deaths increasing on rural roads? There are still unanswered questions here. """
by A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 | 2025-10-09 13:21:33+00:00
<< Optimal for what?

Optimal for the environment I am living in.

<< Do you think that person B is wrong to be upset about the choice of person A or not?

Oh boy. I am not responsible for you. By this tirade, you only demonstrate to me you are willing to make suboptimal choices so that you can feel better about yourself. That is cool, but don't drag me down with you.

By your logic, each time you breathe out CO2, it forces me to deal with unwanted costs and a change to my environment. Can you hear how ridiculous that argument is at its core?
by branko_d | 2025-10-09 13:22:04+00:00
Why? It's just a property of type transformation.

Assuming Parent <- Child ("<-" denotes inheritance):

- If Generic<Parent> <- Generic<Child>: it's covariant.

- If Generic<Parent> -> Generic<Child>: it's contravariant.

- Otherwise: it's invariant.

Or at least it's that straightforward in C#. Are there complications in Rust?
by towolf | 2025-10-09 13:23:36+00:00
> I honestly say the films from Tarr are arguably the best book-to-film adaptations ever, especially Sátántangó, he is the master of literary filmmaking where the spirit of text comes across the screen perfectly.

If that is so, then these are books that you read to experience ultimate ennui?

I know the films, I've watched them all, but doing e.g. Satantango in book form sounds not so enticing?
by legitster | 2025-10-09 13:24:02+00:00
The answer is no. Framework is not putting money into far right causes. They are paying for open source software.

The politics of some of the contributors is questionable. But it's not illegal to have bad opinions and exercise free speech. And it's certainly not Frameworks job to morally vet every person they interact with.

I do not need to know about the political opinions of the people who grow my food, or change my tires, or build my tools. And I am getting growing tired of intersectional witch hunts, especially when we're getting to so many layers of abstraction.
by CalRobert | 2025-10-09 13:24:07+00:00
We may get a macabre opportunity to test the idea that this is related to very large vehicles, since Europe has been importing these incredibly large trucks (which, incidentally, do not meet EU safety standards, but are imported under a loophole). There are over 20,000 Dodge Rams in Europe (sometimes it feels like they're all here in the Netherlands) - see https://www.transportenvironment.org/uploads/files/2024-07-0... - and 20% more were imported in 2023 than 2022.

Worryingly, Von Der Leyen, in addition to capitulating to Trump on tariffs, apparently agreed to allow more of these things to be imported. https://www.transportenvironment.org/articles/eu-cave-in-on-...
by ieie3366 | 2025-10-09 13:24:24+00:00
Not really. WSL was made because Microsoft wanted to preserve the ’average normie dev’ demographic who were increasingly moving to MacOS/Linux because the tooling was ass. Think a developer in some boring big insurance company.

Microsoft does not and never will give a shit about some open source/privacy purist user.

Now the IT department can give them windows laptops with WSL and everybody stays happy
by theknarf | 2025-10-09 13:24:24+00:00
Gemini is really bad with tool calling, doesn't matter if you use it with Gemini CLI or with OpenCode, its just that the model itself is not a agentic model. It can be okay if only use it for asking stuff about the codebase, but not for doing agentic stuff. It'll waste large parts of its context window just failing to do tool calling properly.
by Rarebox | 2025-10-09 13:25:52+00:00
Interesting example! I've been learning AVX512 by using it to optimize Huffman coding. I found _mm512_permutexvar_epi8 and used it to do byte-indexed lookups, but _mm512_permutex2var_epi8 means I can get by with 2 shuffles and 1 comparison instead of 4 shuffles and 3 comparisons. In the end, on my CPU (AMD 9950x), changing to _mm512_permutex2var_epi8 only sped up compression by ~2%.

Compared to Huff0[1] (used by Zstd), my AVX512 code is currently ~40% faster at both compression and decompression. This requires using 32 datastreams instead of 4 used by Huff0.

[1] https://github.com/Cyan4973/FiniteStateEntropy
by IgorPartola | 2025-10-09 13:26:46+00:00
The obnoxious thing is that overly aggressive firewalls have killed any IP protocols that are not TCP or UDP. Even ICMP is often blocked or partially blocked.

In the mean time we could have had nice things: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stream_Control_Transmission_Pr...

SCTP would be a fantastic protocol for HTTP/HTTPS. Pipelining, multi homing, multi streaming, oh my.
by rufus_foreman | 2025-10-09 13:26:56+00:00
>> The two main reasons to me are: 1. Drivers don't look for pedestrians, and 2. pedestrians expect drivers to follow rules.

If that is the cause, why did the number of drivers not looking for pedestrians suddenly start increasing around 2010?

>> Another contributing factor is of course the huge vehicles that crush people with drivers barely noticing

"If the increase of size and frequency of trucks and SUVs was behind the increase in pedestrian deaths, we wouldn’t expect to see an increase in the frequency of pedestrians killed by sedans or compact cars. However, if we look at pedestrian deaths by model of car, we see that pedestrian deaths involving popular sedans have increased as well. Pedestrian deaths involving Honda Civics and Accords, Toyota Corollas and Camrys, and Nissan Altimas have all increased substantially"
by jacquesm | 2025-10-09 13:27:04+00:00
So many companies do not understand this simple principle. Blast radius reduction. But no, they need to have everything online, and instantly accessible all the time. Because they can't possibly be inconvenienced with a short delay in case they ever want to look at that piece of data that they will never want to look at anyway.

It is going to take a long time before companies realize that data they don't need is a liability, not an asset.
by clausecker | 2025-10-09 13:27:18+00:00
I'm talking about how they are able to integrate stuff that normally wouldn't fit into 32 bits (such as 3 operand simd with masking), not about getting the instruction set more compact. ARM knows how to do this (Thumb being the most compact mainstream ISA is evidence of that), they just have decided to waste a bit more space to make decoding simpler, while also adding more quality-of-life features.
by caminante | 2025-10-09 13:27:33+00:00
I've found that the MBB > Big4 trope has largely disappeared (Look at comp at Partner and N-2 levels.)

MBB still has an edge for general management consulting, but I see demand dwindling, despite the annual occurrence of a middle eastern sovereign wealth fund paying $100M for a study to build a wind powered ice skating rink on top of a helicopter pad.
by juliangmp | 2025-10-09 13:27:42+00:00
Ironically, the folks here that have made experience with the state operated railway (Deutsche Bundesbahn) back when it existed (until 1993) say mostly positive things, especially compared to today. The modern German railway is a combination of both the state and a private company. So we get a for-profit monopoly that's ripping you off but also gets subsidized by the state. The worst of both worlds.

This model of kind-of privatization is used in Germany in a few areas and it's god awful for everyone involved, like with the hospitals.

I don't like falling politics especially here on HN but I cannot for the life of me understand why this model is still being defended by some people.
by wumms | 2025-10-09 13:27:42+00:00
The phys.org article mentions it: "[...] the team carried out static and dynamic tests in a wind tunnel with a variety of wind speeds and ground surfaces under a low atmospheric pressure of 17 millibars.

Results showed that wind speeds of 9–10 meters per second were sufficient to set the rover in motion over a range of Mars-like terrains, including smooth and rough surfaces, sand, pebbles and boulder field."
by ninkendo | 2025-10-09 13:28:23+00:00
> Processing is defined in the legislation

The whole discussion here is how the legislation's definition is lacking, because it excludes otherwise perfectly healthy foods.

You tried to clarify it by saying "it's about processing", and when pressed, said the definition is what the legislation says it is.

You see how this is circular?

> By and large it's ingredients most people use and recognise in their own kitchens

I have MSG in my kitchen. Does that make it ok then? An "ultra-processed" food becomes "ok" if people just... see it more often?

This is exactly the sort of blanket BS the OP was talking about.
by jibal | 2025-10-09 13:29:07+00:00
"counterexample: an example that refutes or disproves a proposition or theory"

Yes, the article is about it ... which has no bearing on my point, and just repeats the logic error.

It is frequently the case that a counterexample is obviously (or readily seen to be) a counterexample to a conjecture. That has no bearing on how long it takes to find the counterexample. e.g., in 1756 Euler conjectured that there are no integers that satisfy a^4+b^4+c^4=d^4 It took 213 years to show that 95800^4+217519^4+414560^4=422481^4

satifies it ... "obviously".
by blindseer | 2025-10-09 13:29:36+00:00
Most of my gripes are when trying to use Julia the way a software engineer would use a programming language.

Most "data scientist" code is exploratory (it's a prototype or a script for an one-off exploration) in nature. And my main gripe is that making that code production ready and maintainable over a long period of time is so difficult that I would switch to Rust instead. If I were going to switch to Rust, I might as well start with Python.
by helle253 | 2025-10-09 13:29:49+00:00
a couple of weeks ago, i was walking my 3 year old daughter and her friend to the beach, pushing them along in a wagon.

I was crossing the street (a busy thoroughfare) in a marked crosswalk, that did not have a yield/stop sign or streetlight. A middle aged man in an SUV floored it in front of me. As he drove by he shouted 'FUCK YOUUU', as if I was in the wrong for walking in the crosswalk.

Anyways, there's no reason i'm sharing this anecdote.
by hownowbrowncow | 2025-10-09 13:30:09+00:00
Prettier and other format-on-save tools remain a huge quality of life improvement. I also think it found success because the defaults and choices outlined in the article were very wisely chosen: very readable in almost every context. The right tradeoffs were made both in printing logic and psychology with options/rollout.

One other subtle interaction that is hard to live without now: watching code shift with format-on-save is the fastest feedback on whether code will build/run. Don’t need to look at another console for a syntax error almost ever.
by A_D_E_P_T | 2025-10-09 13:30:11+00:00
"Nested comments sorted by upvotes" is, for free and frank discussion, inherently far worse than non-nested in-line comments. With the latter there's no hive-mind effect, no consensus-seeking, no dopamine/approval-chasing. Also, traditional forums tended to encourage longer-form posts (which you can still see in places like Spacebattles), which naturally contained quite a lot of technical detail and pictures, whereas Reddit (and HN) are optimized for very short comments. In Reddit's case, smarmy one-liners, usually.

But the main problem, to repeat for emphasis, is that the upvote/downvote system (even if it's fair and used virtuously, and it usually isn't,) stifles disagreement and debate.
by pengfeituan | 2025-10-09 13:30:13+00:00
The first issue is related to the inner behavior of LLMs. Human can ignore some detailed contents of code and copy and paste, but LLM convert them into hidden states. It is a process of compression. And the output is a process of decompression. And something maybe lost. So it is hard for LLM to copy and paste. The agent developer should customize the edit rules to do this.

The second issue is that, LLM does not learn much high level context relationship of knowledge. This can be improved by introducing more patterns in the training data. And current LLM training is doing much on this. I don't think it is a problem in next years.
by benjiro | 2025-10-09 13:30:21+00:00
Just delete your old comments...

I learned a simply truth about social media. When you answer a person in a discussion, are you answering the person or the world?

When you are answering the person, and the person has seen your response by time or counter answer, there really is no need to keep your post alive beyond a few weeks.

By then the topic is already on page 10 and only of interest to google / bots / AI.

Is this a problem for the future? Not really ... if the answer is important like i want the world to keep seeing it, you keep it undeleted.

If you did a product review, keep it alive, but just answer people, or having discussions that have no relevants a year from now, just get rid of them.

But lets be honest, most of our answers are often discussions and not some deep zen state thinking exercises that everybody needs to see years from now.

The world has not gotten better and your faced with a dilemma. Reject social media totally and avoid all the mess of people using your past post history, bots and AI/LLMs eating your data non-stop, or potential profiling. Let alone if governments change...

Or use this trick ... there really is no perfect answer and you do what you feel is good for you.
by jihadjihad | 2025-10-09 13:30:23+00:00
I had a pretty long regex in a file that was old and crusty, and when I had Claude add a couple helpers to the file, it changed the formatting of the regex to be a little easier on the eyes in terms of readability.

But I just couldn't trust it. The diff would have been no help since it went from one long gnarly line to 5 tight lines. I kept the crusty version since at least I am certain it works.
by anthonylevine | 2025-10-09 13:31:19+00:00
I literally did to the person who asked. lol.

>lol. The moment Guillermo posted that picture, the internet was awash with blogs and pieces about how to move away from Vercel (who everyone now sees as the stewards of React). This is actually kinda hilarious to have to respond to and explain to.

>Just because you don't have principles, doesn't mean other people don't.

>Cmon. You can't possibly believe actions don't have consequences, do you?
by deepsquirrelnet | 2025-10-09 13:31:20+00:00
It’s a result of the lack of rigor in how it’s being used. Machine learning has been useful for years despite less than 100% accuracy, and the way you trust it is through measurement. Most people using or developing with AI today have punted on that because it’s hard or time consuming. Even people who hold titles of machine learning engineer seem to have forgotten.

We will eventually reach a point where people are teaching each other how to perform evaluation. And then we’ll probably realize that it was being avoided because it’s expense to even get to the point where you can take a measurement and perhaps you didn’t want to know the answer.
by pessimizer | 2025-10-09 13:31:56+00:00
> How did you establish the posters were Russian or Iranian, other than by time zone?

To a lot of people, Russian is just a state of mind. It simply means that you disagree with them, or the regime that they support. Also, the mods on reddit are overwhelmingly these people, banning all opposing opinions, or banning people for being Russian, or Iranian, or Chinese, etc...

They think this is legitimate: aaah, so you're Chinese. I knew there was something wrong when you insisted that the Chinese weren't evil thieves hellbent on destroying freedom, by nature. You're not allowed to post in the West.

All governance in the western world has become weak as hell. You only need a few bucks to corrupt anything, unless somebody with a few more bucks is already corrupting it. And certain intelligence agencies have the deepest pockets. Maybe little fiefdoms wasn't the best way to structure the internet? Maybe section 230 would be obviated if there were clear, deliberative processes to allow entire groups to both take action and responsibility for what they allow in their discussions?

Take note about how adhering to parliamentary methods protects private organizations: in most places, having proper rules set up (not EULAs and ToCs) actually has the practical effect of creating law because it sets up obligations to the users as well as obligations from the users. There's no such thing as a benevolent dictator.
by friendzis | 2025-10-09 13:32:12+00:00
> Models are still very bad at determining truth from opinion, but these are exactly the times when we need the models to work the best.

Suppose models could determine truth and opinion. How would anyone go about training that into the model? Even in unsupervised, adversarial, whatever training scenarios you still need some kind of framework to discern between the two. Academic manuscripts? There are decades of publications built upon "discoveries" later retracted or shown to be falsified.

How would you build the truth/opinion vector(-s) with impartial objectivity?

> <...> a model can be taught to identify the difference between honest opinion and bad faith actors, or more critically identify confidently asserted statements from those supported by reasoning.

You have a confidently asserted statement {from an industry veteran, backed by nothing but credibility}, and a statement supported by reasoning{, which is in turn supported by... implicit assumptions, verging on wild guesses and exaggerations}. Do you see a reasonable way to somehow embed the context in curly braces in any part of the LLM pipeline without nullifying the need for the LLM itself?
by jklowden | 2025-10-09 13:32:17+00:00
Note well: the claims about TCP come with some evidence, in the form of a graph. The claims for QUIC do not.

Many of the claims are dubious. TCP has "no notion of multiple steams"? What are two sockets, then? What is poll(2)? The onus is on QUIC to explain why it’s better for the application to multiplex the socket than for the kernel to multiplex the device. AFAICT that question is assumed away in a deluge of words.

If the author thinks it’s the "end of TCP sockets", show us the research, the published papers and meticulous detail. Then tell me again why I should eschew the services of TCP and absorb its complexity into my application.