MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by nobody9999 | 2025-10-15 01:21:29+00:00
>I never said that I'd heard any officer state that they'd lied to a reporter. I said that I believe that access is/was choreographed (to present a certain narrative to the reporter), and that I don't think the reporters get the 'real dirt' from Pentagon access that they think they do (because most officers doing a desk tour there know they are walking a political tightrope). >[...] >I don't take notes on the podcasts I listen to, so I don't have episode-specific citations for you.

Fair enough and thank you for the references.

Like I said, this wasn't some kind of "gotcha" exercise.
by hunterpayne | 2025-10-15 01:22:10+00:00
I'm not sure the word 'preventable' belongs in that sentence. Odds are, if COVID-19 gets you, in the absence of COVID-19 some other cold or flu will get you instead (or in the near future). That's very different from an accident where the outcomes are 40+ years of life apart in many cases.

That's why gross deaths aren't a great measure. Lost expected years of life remaining is much better. Its why we morn the loss of a child so much more than a grandparent.
by wiedehopf | 2025-10-15 01:22:19+00:00
If you're not comfortable running my readsb (fork of dump1090) which is the feed client used by live / lol / fi and some other sites, then you can probably just send them data using socat.

Most of them will have port 30004 open for their ingest domain, usually feed.domain.com. Thus you'd hook up socat to 127.0.0.1:30005 (i assume you run dump1090 or readsb locally as a decoder). And make socat send that to feed.adsb.lol:30004 and/or feed.airplanes.live:30004

If you're in a remote location, you don't need to worry about mlat-client as MLAT requires at least 4 receivers that receive common aircraft.
by dylan604 | 2025-10-15 01:22:20+00:00
I'm not so sure. I've watched my cat sit there and scheme. Sure, it may be not much further than "what's this thing do if I bat it with my paw?" or "what's that taste like?" or "can I train my hooman to refill the food dish if I incessantly whine and be as annoying as possible?", but they are definitely thinking about it. Then again, I've watched my cat stare off into space as if he's pondering the mysteries of the universe, but he's probably just trying to figure out the best route he could take to get that squirrel if he could just get outside.
by armchairhacker | 2025-10-15 01:22:39+00:00
But the people in office need some power, enough to cause problems if they're bad. Otherwise you have the failures of no government: "might makes right", no coordinated projects, no defense, etc.; or another group (e.g. corporation) becomes the de-facto government.

Hence the root problem, that we haven't discovered a way to consistently have "good" government, whether it's a dictatorship or democracy. Perhaps with technology, we can invent a better form of government, e.g. a "super-democracy" where people vote on individual decisions (though even today I can imagine issues that would cause).

Until then, the key point I make is that you can have a government where some people ("leaders") do have more power than others, but not enough power for total control. The hopefully-realistic ideal is that the government has enough power to defend itself against an external threat always, and coordinate large projects when functioning well; but not too much so that, when functioning badly, essential internal systems are preserved, and when it's replaced (because as mentioned it will eventually collapse) the transition is minimally disruptive.
by csande17 | 2025-10-15 01:22:44+00:00
One question towards maturity: has any working version of the Rust compiler ever existed? By which I mean one that successfully upholds the memory-safety guarantees Rust is supposed to make, and does not have any "soundness holes" (which IIRC were historically used as a blank check / excuse to break backwards compatibility).

The current version of the Rust compiler definitely doesn't -- there's known issues like https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/57893 -- but maybe there's some historical version from before the features that caused those problems were introduced.
by Braxton1980 | 2025-10-15 01:24:10+00:00
>As much as I think our government is currently ran by a bunch of nincompoops

Why do you think this? The Netherlands economy seems be pretty good compared with other countries. Growth is slower but that's partially due to US tariffs.

Is it just a standard thing now to say "the government are idiots" or they are making huge mistakes. Don't you think they creates a long term issue where people are never satisfied and constantly electing a new government. Maybe this causes the government to focus on short term wins to avoid that.
by senectus1 | 2025-10-15 01:24:30+00:00
I mean.. I dont agree with the Trump administration on nearly anything. But deciding that they dont like what an outsider says and blocking them entrance based on that is not a free speech issue, they're not citizens.

Edit: yeah ok fair call. it needs to apply to anyone, still the US needs to be able to say : I dont like you, you cant enter.
by pryce | 2025-10-15 01:24:44+00:00
We often accept some limits on speech - such as disallowing threats or blackmail. But on what planet is some person stating that Charlie Kirk "devoted his entire life to spreading racist, xenophobic, misogynistic rhetoric" an endorsement of Kirk's murder?

How is anyone supposed to believe the administration is being at all genuine when it categorizes that sentence as an endorsement of murder and then applies punitive action toward the man who wrote it?

Are we now at the point where (in Soviet Russian style) the government gleefully makes absurd factual claims and administers capricious punishments specifically as a demonstration of the government power to oppress?
by trhway | 2025-10-15 01:25:14+00:00
>Land use is one of the sticking points of the energy transition, both for agriculture and biodiversity.

it may be a plus for solar if it can be shown that the shadow from the panels is a good thing in those cases

There is also probably enough toxic/polluted wasteland around so that solar can be built there without taking "good" lands.

It may be that AI will happen to be the savior of this planet - by creating huge demand for energy it will allow the cheapest - i.e. renewables - to get into dominating market position, and may be Big Tech would even get into and productize the fusion.
by mayhemducks | 2025-10-15 01:25:54+00:00
I think Nuclear power definitely needs to be a big part of the energy mix - it just has so many benefits.

I think rooftop solar is also excellent, but only in theory. In practice, I feel like rooftop solar allows public utilities to abdicate their responsibility. It diminishes the affect of collective pressure on major energy producers to hold up their end of the bargain to invest in clean energy because it shifts costs to homeowners and effectively makes them a very weak competitor to big energy producers. A power grid full of smart systems and robust transmission lines is an amazing resource - but it is very capital intensive. How do we replace that with rooftop solar that many homeowners seek loans to install? How does that incentivize power companies, who are allowed to operate monopolies, to invest in clean energy infrastructure?
by kazinator | 2025-10-15 01:26:21+00:00
> In incorrect code, the branches are taken, but code without the branches just behaves unpredictably.

It's like seat belts.

E.g. what if we drive four blocks and then the case occurs when the seatbelt is needed need the seatbelt? Okay, we have an explicit test for that.

But we cannot test everything. We have not tested what happens if we drive four blocks, and then take a right turn, and hit something half a block later.

Screw it, just remove the seatbelts and not have this insane untested space whereby we are never sure whether the seat belt will work properly and prevent injury!
by scarecrowbob | 2025-10-15 01:26:49+00:00
I understand that your theory holds a lot of sway.

I am not in favor of doing anything that cedes more power to the assholes who want it.

I'm not a legal scholar but it certainly feels like "removing citizenship from classes of folks" so that they can be deported to purify the body of the volk is a thing that has been done, so anything that we can to maintain the rights of non-citizens seems to be reflexively self-interested.

I do understand that the government of the US will do whatever it feels like- it's never felt like that they wouldn't, like, drone strike a citizen if they felt like it. As much as I despise the views of folks like Randy Weaver, it's been a long time since I thought the US might not just shoot folks if it felt like it to.

So here is a question:

if they don't really care much about the doctrines of laws, why should me and mine?
by dghlsakjg | 2025-10-15 01:27:25+00:00
Many large industrial sites will cut deals with power companies for very cheap rates in exchange for not running during peak hours. Classic example is aluminum refining, and, depending on process, steel refining.

If you can do demand based pricing, you could even end up with new time arbitrage business models. A battery farm or hydro facility stores energy when rates are cheap and discharges when rates go up.
by manwe150 | 2025-10-15 01:28:33+00:00
If it was as completely tested as claimed, then switching to rust would be trivial. All you need to do is pass the test suite and all bugs would be gone. I can think of other reasons not to jump to rust (it is a lot of code, sqlite already works well, and test coverage is very good but also incomplete, and rust only solves a few correctness problems)—just not because of claiming sqlite is already tested enough to be bug free of the kinds of issues that rust might actually prevent.
by heavyset_go | 2025-10-15 01:28:36+00:00
> There should likely be legislation enacted that raises chat logs to the level of psychotherapist-patient privilege.

Medical records are up for grabs when it comes to investigations/discovery/subpoenas/warrants/etc, it's one of the privacy exceptions in HIPAA.

They can also be used to try to identify alleged criminals, missing people, fugitives, etc. For example, if they have DNA samples, bite impressions (even though it's BS), law enforcement can even demand matching medical records without warrants.
by 0xbadcafebee | 2025-10-15 01:29:16+00:00
Well you're partially right. After all, the "big tech approved phone OS" is actually Linux, so just having a free OS isn't enough to prevent it from being co-opted and turned into a locked-down platform.

But the partially wrong part is, we can make our own platform. PCs let you install and run any software you want, because it's an open platform. If we make an open platform smartphone that can compete on features with the closed behemoths, and that then becomes popular enough, then banks may offer apps on that.

But this is tricky too. Linux already has issues getting official support from corporations. We'd need our open platform to be compatible with the closed ones, so that it's easy for banks to run their apps on our open platform. There are already ways around this, like virtual machines to run Android, or other methods. But the closed behemoths may try and end-run around this, like DRM. So we'll still need to advocate for our rights and compatibility.
by weavejester | 2025-10-15 01:30:05+00:00
> I'll go a step further and point out that you have no way of ever proving that the morals you carry as an individual weren't gifted to you by that same society.

Oh sure, I won't deny I'm influenced by the society around me, but my morality can't be entirely a product of that society, otherwise I wouldn't find any laws to be unjust.

> You and I don't agree with that, but we aren't a product of the 20s. If you think you would be an exception, then I'd call you egotistical.

But I was in minority when it came to gay rights in the 1990s, and I'm in the current minority when it comes to trans rights in the 2020s.

Why do you assume that I wouldn't also be in the minority regarding civil rights, were I born earlier? I'm not saying I'd be in the 1%, but I'd like to think I'd at least be in the 40%.

I guess I should at least applaud the honesty of someone who implies they would be supporting the Klan or worse if they were born a century earlier, but I think your mistake is assuming everyone is like you.

> In doing any of those things, they've ceased to be protesters. They are now rioters. Rioting is illegal. And it does warrant a violent response.

I would consider that to be extremely immoral. All this time we've been talking about how violence should be a last resort, and now suddenly it isn't?

> Let's look even closer; blocking a highway prevents emergency transportation causing loss of life.

The emergency vehicles would use the shoulder to pass the traffic, and the protestors could just move out the way when an emergency vehicle came. I'm not saying you don't have a point that lives could be endangered, but it's a leap to say that people would certainly die, even in this hypothetical example of yours.

And what about graffiti? How would that endanger life?

> No it's a good way to kill people. See the examples above. You've just lowered your moral standing to less than the law. I don't see how you can come back from that.

So all non-violent civil disobedience is immoral, because you were able to think of an example of how a specific act of civil disobedience could be the cause of a death.

Fine. Let's use the same logic on laws.

The second amendment guarantees every American a right to bear arms, but this includes Americans who are irresponsible. An irresponsible gun owner might leave their firearm where a child could find it, leading to the death of that child.

Voilà: a example of how a specific law could cause a death, which by your logic means all laws must be immoral.

> The columns are getting too narrow to continue. I wish you well, and I hope you'll change your mind about breaking the law, or that you'll at least wind up in jail before you get someone killed.

Thanks for the discussion. I can assure you that I have no current plans to break the law, but if a dream team of professional criminals recruits me for an ambitious and improbable casino heist, you understand that I can't make any guarantees.
by zb3 | 2025-10-15 01:30:31+00:00
For it to succeed, they must also help put pressure on governments (countries like Brazil or Italy) and banks to stop depending on "Play Integrity" because only Google has the keys (and blocks leaked ones) so we can't count on bypasses being available (it's not just a matter of obfuscation).

This needs to be done before age verification apps become universal..
by credit_guy | 2025-10-15 01:31:02+00:00
In case of a war with China, the US aircraft carriers would operate quite far out in the sea, most likely many hundreds of miles away from the continent. Submarines could try to get at them, but again, the most likely US tactic would be to have the carriers constantly on the move. China has 48 old Type 33 diesel-electric submarines, with a top (submerged) speed of 13 knots, less than half the top speed of any US carrier. The only hope for such a submarine to catch a carrier strike group would be to lie in wait. But the ocean is very large, and such a strategy is probabilistically very unlikely to succeed. China also has 6 nuclear attack submarines. It is however quite likely that in the even of a war, they'd be the first to be targeted by the US Navy. Sinking ships (or submarines) goes both ways.
by James_K | 2025-10-15 01:31:06+00:00
> Code that only writes through the reference is correctly typed with respect to a super-type of A (it is valid to call the code with a reference to a supertype of A).

I'm not trying to be snarky, I genuinely want to know what you think of that code snippet I showed you. You claim it should work, but anyone with an understanding of programming would tell you it shouldn't. You can't write to a member variable that doesn't exist. Have you encountered inheritance before? Do you know what a “super-type” is? The mistake you're making here is very basic and I should like to know your level of experience.
by ycui1986 | 2025-10-15 01:31:10+00:00
$3 ADCs are not cheap ADCs. Cheap ADCs are the one embedded inside cheap MCU. These days, TI sell cheap ADC/DAC that is artificially limited to 10/12-bit, but with linearity at more than 16-bit. The cost of producing bad ones versus good ones are not much different. They go through the same semiconductor process. So long as the fundamental design is sound, cheap ADC don’t perform any worse.
by notatoad | 2025-10-15 01:31:27+00:00
i see the comments here are pretty cynical about this post, and probably for good reason. especially "you might have to start taxing consumption instead of income because people won't have income anymore"

but at least a couple of these proposals seem to boil down to needing to tax the absolute crap out of the AI companies. which seems pretty obviously true, and its interesting that the ai companies are already saying that.
by martin-t | 2025-10-15 01:32:37+00:00
Terrorism is barely an inconvenience. Just now in another top HN post, terrorism accounts for less than 0.001% of US deaths. That's percent so less than 1 in 100k. It essentially does not matter. It could increase tenfold and I'd be fine with it.

But the point I am trying to make is that surveillance does not work to stop the crimes people actually care about. Even if your biggest fear is terrorism, surveillance is not gonna stop somebody ramming their car into a crowd. Those who want to create fear have a myriad of ways which cannot be stopped without absolute, total surveillance, which makes any kind of resistance impossible.

I don't wanna live in a society where I have a 10% chance to get caught littering. Not because I wanna litter but because at some point, I might find myself homeless and needing to steal food to not starve. Or I might find myself living in a dictatorship and needing to drone the fucker who's sending my friends/family to a gulag.

Everything has a price. If the price of reducing common crime by 10% reduces the chance of a successful revolution by 20%, then it's not worth it. Because people are only free as long as they revoke their consent. If 50% of the population agree they live in a dictatorship, they should have a way to remove the government, whether by a ballot box or an ammo box.
by drpixie | 2025-10-15 01:33:42+00:00
Yes BUT "I paid it back, so nothing bad ever happened" is not sufficient.

Someone (or a company) does something bad - yes, pay it back, but there needs to be some punishment for doing evil. Pay back X 100. Or pay purchaser + pay fine.

Just paying back the cost (or fraud) is saying "it's fine if you don't get caught, and if you do get caught, there's no real cost to you."
by hdseggbj | 2025-10-15 01:34:04+00:00
They also enrich the parasitic bureaucracy. Climate change is a scam. Not because it isn't changing, of course it's changing, but humans can't and won't change it back, nor should they bother trying.

What they should do, scientifically, is adapt, like all organisms.

The irony is those demanding we change our behavior to reverse climate change are the ones actually fighting to keep humans from changing by adapting to changing climatic conditions, and so they are the biggest threat to human survival as a species.

We're gonna burn every deep of oil. Petroleum use goes up every year, regardless.
by some_guy_nobel | 2025-10-15 01:34:21+00:00
Would you consider yourself a supporter of free speech?

Do you think it should apply only to citizens?

We can default to the Supreme Court's ruling in Bridges vs Wixon: "Freedom of speech and of press is accorded to aliens residing in this country.

https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=107220981080384...
by dathinab | 2025-10-15 01:34:31+00:00
It's kinda sad to read as most of their arguments might seem right at first but if put under scrutiny really fall apart.

Like why defend C in 2025 when you only have to defend C in 2000 and then argue you have a old, stable, deeply tested, C code base which has no problem with anything like "commonly having memory safety issues" and is maintained by a small group of people very highly skilled in C.

Like that argument alone is all you need, a win, simple straight forward, hard to contest.

But most of the other arguments they list can be picked apart and are only half true.
by willmadden | 2025-10-15 01:34:34+00:00
Netherlands: Aurelia Brouwers, 29, with depression and autism (non-terminal), euthanized in 2018; critics cite expansion to mental illness and potential coercion risks.

Switzerland: 8% of assisted deaths involve mental disorders like severe depression; cases show weak oversight, allowing non-terminal approvals despite coercion concerns.

Canada: 2022 Veterans Affairs cases: Caseworkers offered MAiD to 4+ veterans in poverty seeking benefits, indicating systemic coercion and cost-saving motives.

Oregon: Kate Cheney, 85, with early dementia (mental/non-terminal elements), approved 1999 amid daughter pressure suspicions; evaluations noted influence but oversight permitted despite weak safeguards.
by bikeshaving | 2025-10-15 01:35:00+00:00
I don’t think I’m using it as a metaphor? To “have interesting latent spaces” just means you have access to the actual weights and biases, the artifact produced by fine-tuning/training models, or you can somehow “see” activations as you feed input through the model. This can be turned into interesting 3D visualizations and reveal “latent” connections in the data which often align with and allow us to articulate similarities in the actual phenomena which these “spaces” classify.

Not many people have the privilege of access to these artifacts, or the skill to interpret these abstract, multi-dimensional spaces. I want more of these visualizations, with more spaces which encode different modalities.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latent_space
by ternaryoperator | 2025-10-15 01:35:01+00:00
> Recoding SQLite in Go is unlikely since Go hates assert()

Any idea what this refers to? assert is a macro in C. Is the implication that OP wants the capability of testing conditions and then turning off the tests in a production release? If so, then I think the argument is more that go hates the idea of a preprocessor. Or have I misunderstood the point being made?
by theamk | 2025-10-15 01:35:34+00:00
:) virtual area cleaning, I've missed a word.

This is when you only want to clean only left half of the room, for example. In the old robotics vacuums, your choices were either enough physical "virtual wall" units (those little stubby boxes you place on the floor) or physically fencing it, with overturned chairs or boxes or something.

With the smart vacuums, you get the nifty map and you can draw the lines/boxes around the area you want cleaned. Very convenient, but naturally requires some sort of device with a screen (to show map) and position input (to draw the boundaries), like a phone.