MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by debtta | 2025-10-05 08:44:28+00:00
There's quite a lot of confusion about this question here.

You are right that debt of this type are individual and other parties (spouses, heirs) can't be pursued for it. But it has to be taken into account in a divorce.

Johnny and Janey have a $1m property, $200k savings, $200k retirement between them. They should each get $700k from a divorce (assume they were penniless students when they got together and acquired all the assets during the marriage).

If Janey* wants to stay in the house, she only has to borrow an extra $300k to buy Johnny out. That plus her share of the financial assets, pays for his share of the house.

Now Johnny reveals that he owes half a million in credit card debt that he never told Janey about. She can't just say "That's your problem, it comes out of your share." The marital assets are diminished by that amount before division.

Janey now gets $450k, an even split of the net assets. She has to come up with $550k to keep the house, effectively paying off half of Johnny's gambling debt as well as buying out the difference between the house and the financial assets.

If she doesn't try and keep the house, the cash she gets represents half of the assets minus half the debt. If Johnny owes $2 million, the married couple together are $600k negative. For her to leave the marriage, she has to pay half of this towards Johnny's debts. So she will have to come up with $300k cash to give him, on top of losing all her assets.

Of course, Janey married Johnny for better or worse, and that includes his gambling addiction. But it might feel unfair to Janet, especially if she didn't know about the gambling and couldn't have done anything to stop Johnny running up the debt. And Johnny's lawyer makes sure Johnny dredges up everything he owes in the negotiation, the opposite of the situation with assets where a sharp lawyer might tell Johnny to tread lightly owning up to his gold coins/offshore account. In the worst case Johnny hits Vegas when the divorce seems to be inevitable, knowing that the losses will go into the joint pool, whereas his winnings can be spent on partying or pocketed in cash.

* Divorce participants' behavior is stereotyped by gender. Apologies to all the thrifty houseproud Johnnys and louche deadbeat Janeys out there.
by TrackerFF | 2025-10-05 08:45:24+00:00
I've noticed that the enshitifacation of e-commerce marketplaces has become a global problem. Here's what I've observed for the past 5 years or so:

- Pretty much every webstore of size will now list / sell everything, where 99% of the products are not in stock, and needs to be ordered - probably from the vendors in China, or whatever.

- Explosion in independent 3rd party sellers, within those stores. You now have to check that you're explicitly purchasing from the webstore you're visiting, and not some third party they allow to sell through them. Luckily some stores have become better at notifying the buyer that the item is being bought from someone else, and not the store.

- Acceptance of lookalike products.

Basically, it seems like all the stores are competing to be AliExpress and Temu now.
by honkostani | 2025-10-05 08:46:20+00:00
It can help you, to hack your own behavior and avoid exhausting, self-damaging solutions you use to "mask" and blend in. If you can not function in a similar way, all attempts todo so are doomed to fail and result in burnout. So a diagnosis, if it is correct, helps you to avoid these traps and archive your goals, without self-destructive behavior - making it a good thing.

What it should not be - is a excuse to park dysfunction into the public, which has certain standards everyone should be able to uphold. You do not get to be rude, because smalltalk exhausts you- you get to avoid smalltalk while not being rude and society will accept that.

A diagnosis is not a doctors prescription to some limited form of sociopathy, that excuses you permanently from helping to uphold civil society and contributing to humanity.Its also not a invitation to hold yourself or others hostage, threatening self-harm or compliance to social rules as goods of trade.
by olliem36 | 2025-10-05 08:47:39+00:00
At Zenning AI, a generalist AI designed to replace entire jobs with just prompts. Our agents typically run autonomously for hours, so effective context management is critical. I'd say that we invest most of our engineering effort into what is ultimately context management, such as:

1. Multi-agent orchestration 2. Summarising and chunking large tool and agent responses 3. Passing large context objects by reference between agents and tools

Two things to note that might be interesting to the community:

Firstly, when managing context, I recommend adding some evals to our context management flow, so you can measure effectiveness as you add improvements and changes.

For example, our evals will measure the impact of using Anthropics memory over time. Thus allowing our team to make a better informed decisions on that tools to use with our agents.

Secondly, there's a tradeoff not mentioned in this article: speed vs. accuracy. Faster summarisation (or 'compaction') comes at a cost of accuracy. If you want good compaction, it can be slow. Depending on the use case, you should adjust your compaction strategy accordingly. For example, (forgive my major generalisation), for consumer facing products speed is usually preferred over a bump in accuracy. However, in business accuracy is generally preferred over speed.
by ivape | 2025-10-05 08:48:17+00:00
The money people are generally unconcerned with what they label themselves as. If anything, you are articulating the chameleon’s nature. That creature will masquerade as necessary.

Sound souls don’t go into certain professions. One doesn’t just go into porn, and one doesn’t just find themselves at the Federal Reserve. Your soul is already blasted before you head down these paths.

We never got soulful outputs from these professions because they are a void, no return.
by jwr | 2025-10-05 08:48:26+00:00
The ideas are correct, but the argument in the article… could use some improvement. In stage 1 ("good for users") Cory describes how the platform becomes bad for users. In stage 2 ("abusing users, good to businesses") he actually describes how Amazon is BAD to businesses. Not the best presentation of his fantastic "enshittification" term.
by cyberax | 2025-10-05 08:49:22+00:00
To add my voice here: I have never had problems with Amazon. And I'm ordering tons of very niche electronics stuff from them. Right now I have two PZEM-016 meters in front of me, connected to an RP2040-based FeatherWing board. All of that was delivered within 2-3 days, as expected, and at a price point that is the same or nearly the same as in other online retailers.

I got a fake product only once, a box with packing peanuts instead of a ZigBee relay. They refunded the cost right away.
by 7bit | 2025-10-05 08:49:28+00:00
This argument is absurd.

You have a trust relationship with your VPS provider. Yes, they can access it, if they want to. The difference is that with a VPS you have contractual privacy and with e.g. Gmail they outright tell you that they scan your emails. So it is a big difference.

With everything, it's question of budget and what risks you accept.
by Kwpolska | 2025-10-05 08:49:40+00:00
Those changes affect the .NET runtime, designed for real computers. This does not preclude the existence of a special runtime designed for Wasm with WasmGC support.

The .NET team appears to be aware of WasmGC [0], and they have provided their remarks when WasmGC was being designed [1].

[0] https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/issues/94420

[1] https://github.com/WebAssembly/gc/issues/77
by creer | 2025-10-05 08:51:02+00:00
Sure. This is rough engineering. If you identify a plausible significant cause, and you attack that, and you get useful improvement, people are not too likely to be overly concerned that there was some confounding factor in the improvement. If there is any excess, it's likely to be in the other direction: deciding that the likely improvement is not worth it. Engineers hate that kind of decision.
by microtonal | 2025-10-05 08:51:19+00:00
They should repair it under warranty, period. If they cannot make a return label, you can send it back. IIRC they are also responsible for the shipping cost, but they can refund it afterwards when they are not able to create a return label.

I think your mistake might be that they are sticking to the letter of the law. Don't ask for your 14-day cool-off period, because strictly I think the product needs to be sealed (though many sellers are more lenient):

https://business.gov.nl/regulation/cancellation-period-sale/

Instead ask for a repair under warranty, which they are required to do as a seller. They cannot point you to the manufacturer, the seller is responsible for handling warranty for the first two years:

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/EN/legal-content/summary/product-g...
by grepfru_it | 2025-10-05 08:51:35+00:00
I sat next to a random person on a flight once. Everyone walking on the plane was gawking at him, shaking his hand, while I sat unphased working on my ability to make a voip call over the new wifi system on united airlines. I eventually looked up who was sitting next to me and found out it was Daryl McDaniels (DMC of Run DMC fame). We both happened to check bags, so I walked up to him and actually apologized for not giving him the same attention that everyone else was on the plane. He laughed and said it felt great to have a flight where the people around him didn't talk his ear off. He gave me a signed autograph and his phone number and then we both went our separate ways.

I just found his autograph while cleaning last night.. now after seeing this comment, I'm going to give him a call tomorrow :)
by roenxi | 2025-10-05 08:51:41+00:00
> Your opinion seems to be...

I'd be impressed if you can link that back to something I said, I don't think my opinion is that at all. I haven't said anything about poor people, for example.

If someone has enough money that wasting it on gambling is a problem, then they clearly had no business giving up hope because "the system" doesn't have the ability to make their lives better. The system that makes their lives better is the money they just wasted, but invested in something productive.

Someone can't claim to be hopeless about the potential to improve their material comfort when the means to do so was just sitting in their bank account. They have money spare - start spending it to make life better.

I'm happy to accept that gamblers are irrational, but their problem isn't that the system is causing them to give up hope, their problem is that they are irrational gamblers. Sucks to be them, but it isn't anything to do with systemic external factors beyond casino advertising which is quite a specific thing and nothing to do with general hopefulness. Or the quite likely reality that they don't know what opportunity looks like despite it being right in front of them.
by 1659447091 | 2025-10-05 08:52:20+00:00
From the wiki page, Christianity from the bible's perspective doesn't have a problem with gambling itself:

> Although the bible does not condemn gambling, instead the desire to get rich is called to account numerous times in the New Testament.

And the Catholic's problem with it is the competition:

> Some parish pastors have also opposed casinos for the additional reason that they would take customers away from church bingo and annual festivals where games such as blackjack, roulette, craps, and poker are used for fundraising.
by Symbiote | 2025-10-05 08:52:57+00:00
https://www.ebay.ie/sch/i.html?_nkw=network+coupler

eBay might have some similar problems as Amazon (fly-by-night retailers from China etc), but at least it doesn't pretend otherwise.

Or from Denmark, but delivery is probably expensive. (Within-EU delivery costs is something I'd like to see the EU improve, to allow smaller businesses to compete internationally with Amazon etc.)

https://www.computersalg.dk/i/2335209/startech-com-cat5e-rj4...
by tacker2000 | 2025-10-05 08:53:04+00:00
Well, germany has customer protection laws, but before amazon, customer service was always worse than in the US i would say.

Just think about Media markt customer service for example…

Amazon changed that by introducing US-style no-questions-asked 30 day returns etc… but nowadays they are slowly chipping away at that, 14 days is the the norm now, (which is the hard limit anyway, since being set into law a couple years ago)

But yes the customer friendliness is slowly being cut down, due to growing costs. Zalando (an online fashion retailer) has also reduced their return policy recently.
by presentation | 2025-10-05 08:54:47+00:00
You don’t need some kind of “social score” to have the chilling effect, if anything I think people self censor more because of the fear of getting berated by others for their beliefs—both by those they know and don’t.

Interestingly I don’t think it’s really “cooling” that happened - if anything it’s been some people becoming extremely hot, and then the majority of people, myself included, are experiencing cooling.

Unfortunately liberals lately reinforce this by being vitriolic over everything and endorsing toxic behaviors like cutting off friends and family because they disagree on politics, which probably undermines the democratic ideals they think they’re defending. [1]

I consider myself overall more aligned with liberals, but as a recent example, it disheartens me to open Facebook after a long time and see so many people I knew from years past reveling in Charlie Kirk’s death as though that makes their cause more sympathetic to alienate anyone who might have agreed with things he said (even if I generally don’t). This just reinforces division and increases the social cooling effect.

[1] https://open.substack.com/pub/theargument/p/were-not-all-goi...
by spwa4 | 2025-10-05 08:55:45+00:00
Isn't single payer just a cop-out? A way to allow government (and every economist hopes: they personally) to simple force outcomes on both medical providers and consumers?

Because that will destroy medical care rather than save it. Just look what's happening in Europe (the waiting lists, and the game of attempting to force neighboring countries to carry the costs of training medical personnel)
by thaumasiotes | 2025-10-05 08:58:11+00:00
> If an individual is winning a lot of money from a bookie repeatedly because of these bad initial prices, then it is a sign that they might have a better model than the bookie, and so it is in the bookie's interest to ban them

I don't think this follows. If an individual is winning a lot of money repeatedly in this way, it is a sign that the bookie should give their bets a lot of weight when adjusting prices. But that information is something the bookie might want.
by solid_fuel | 2025-10-05 08:58:39+00:00
They mostly did, but the limit on distance is pretty tight - according to Wikipedia [0] local loops were limited to 5 km in length (without extra equipment). I imagine that Stockholm's system here both started early and was in a very dense neighborhood of Stockholm, where direct wiring like this was still a tenable solution.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plain_old_telephone_service
by snozolli | 2025-10-05 08:59:37+00:00
There’s no part of expecting people to hand you money that doesn’t obviously lead to your sole purpose being to please those people.

IMO, the people who need to be pleased are the customers, and, IME, management's expectations very often run contrary to those of the customers.

Turns out that anagement really doesn't like negative feedback from engineers which turns out to be echoed by users. I'd rather see career advice on how to prevent management from tanking the company without causing them to resent the engineer(s).
by KaiserPro | 2025-10-05 09:00:54+00:00
As other people have noted, this is an old site, they also note that genz have partially learnt from our mistakes, and turned to ephemeral media, amongst other things.

The rise of AR glasses will of course kneecap anonymity in "real life"

But I look at the general collapse of "civility" in the USA and cant help but think of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behavioral_sink
by digitalPhonix | 2025-10-05 09:01:02+00:00
> If you show up to my manager demanding to know why I made a specific engineering decision, he's not going to tell you

Well if your working in a standards development organisation then your manager probably should.

It looks like (in the US at least) standards development organisations have to have (and follow) very robust transparency processes to not be default-liable for individual decisions.

(Unlike most organisations, such as where where you and your manager from your scenario come from)
by marcyb5st | 2025-10-05 09:02:02+00:00
They are certified. In the sense that if the grid goes down it won't send electricity into it regardless of the settings you have. If you set it up to avoid feeding back energy it is completely transparent from an utility operator perspective. This is at least what the electrician that signed off my installation said and it works for the EU grid. Not sure about US or other parts of the world.
by lazyasciiart | 2025-10-05 09:02:13+00:00
In the US it is perfectly normal to impose lifetime penalties for crimes - a felony record can prevent people from voting, housing, employment, and when all those penalties fuck up their life, they are sometimes still barred from receiving welfare. It is only four years since the law changed to allow student loans for people with drug convictions.

And it is absolutely reasonable that a crime committed in the course of your profession could prevent you ever working in that profession again.
by lock1 | 2025-10-05 09:02:24+00:00
Like other sibling replies said, subranges (or more generally "Refinement types") are more about compile-time guarantees. Your example provides a good example of a potential footgun: a post-validation operation might unknowingly violate an invariant.

It's a good example for the "Parse, don't validate" article (https://lexi-lambda.github.io/blog/2019/11/05/parse-don-t-va...). Instead of creating a function that accepts `int` and returns `int` or throws an exception, create a new type that enforces "`int` less than equal 200"

class LEQ200 { ... } LEQ200 validate(int age) throws Exception { if (age <= 200) return age; else throw Exception(); } LEQ200 works = validate(200); // LEQ200 fails = validate(201); // LEQ200 hmmm = works + 1; // Error in Java LEQ hmmm = works.add(1); // Throws an exception or use Haskell's Either-type / Rust's Result-type

Something like this is possible to simulate with Java's classes, but it's certainly not ergonomic and very much unconventional. This is beneficial if you're trying to create a lot of compile-time guarantees, reducing the risk of doing something like `hmmm = works + 1;`.

These kind of compile-time type voodoo requires a different mindset compared to cargo-cult Java OOP. Whether something like this is ergonomic or performance-friendly depends on the language's support itself.
by watwut | 2025-10-05 09:02:31+00:00
> She has to come up with $550k to keep the house, effectively paying off half of Johnny's gambling debt as well as buying out the difference between the house and the financial assets.

It is even worst - Jane has to pay half those debts even if she dont care about house. If assets minus debt go negative, which they do in case of gamblers, partner is in debt.

That is why the forst advice to partners of gamblers is to divorce asap. Because they easily end up paying for years.
by cthalupa | 2025-10-05 09:02:34+00:00
This would more than halve the amount of relief pitchers needed, so the MLBPA will never ever think about agreeing to it.

Starting pitchers averaged ~5.5 innings per game in 2024, and going 7 is hardly a rare occurrence. You would basically just have starters, 2-3 relief pitchers, one "long-man." vs. the average of 8 on the roster today.
by squigz | 2025-10-05 09:02:50+00:00
Well I don't really have a line, but that doesn't mean I'm going to go linking directly to such sources in public - not everyone agrees with my stance on copyright. Those who do can easily go find it themselves.

Also Macbeth was written 400 years ago. Let's not pretend this is a fair comparison. This author has been dead only 20 years - it might be that their partner is still alive and needs that money, or their children.
by Broken_Hippo | 2025-10-05 09:03:28+00:00
A college fund your parents saved for you isn't your money unless the money is in your name (or possibly set up correctly at the bank). If they just save it in their name, they can spend away as they like. It is their money until it is actually in your name even if you were told it was there as a child.

Which is understandable in many cases if the family actually needs the money before someone goes to college.
by keiferski | 2025-10-05 09:03:52+00:00
You pretty much just repeated the same thing back, so yes, I think that is your opinion.

> If someone has enough money that wasting it on gambling is a problem

They don't have enough money, which is precisely the point. The link I shared shows how lower income people spend dramatically more of their money on lotteries and gambling.

> their problem is that they are irrational gamblers.

How do you think they got that problem? Why do you think they continue to have that problem? It seems to me, that you think it's because they aren't rational enough about managing the money they do have, which...is what you said before: poor people are poor because they're irrational.

You don't seem to factor in the idea that certain groups of people are taken advantage of by bad actors, and that these people become accustomed to this exploitation, and learn helplessness in the face of it.

I think the points I'm making here are pretty obvious truths to anyone that has interacted with / from a lower income background, where gambling, lottery tickets, and other "vices" are widespread. These aren't rational financial decisions, they're consequences of being exploited by more powerful forces.

A working class person addicted to gambling isn't going to suddenly go, "Oh, I should just invest this money into an index fund." That is entirely alien to that culture and group of people. It's not something they were taught, it's not something their friends do, and it's definitely not something the institutions around them are interested in doing.

Now, if you said that, "then the goal should be to educate people so they invest their money and don't just gamble it away," then sure, that's a noble one. But as you said:

> Sucks to be them
by bmacho | 2025-10-05 09:04:01+00:00
> If this article is about hoisting then this is a well-made high-effort high-value article.

? There is no mention of hoisting in the article, not the name or the concept. I am not even sure the author knows the concept of hoisting and that 'let' and 'var' behave differently. All the examples are suspiciously missing the key differences, and all the surrounding text is about the scope of the if construct.
by grepfru_it | 2025-10-05 09:04:03+00:00
I had my email banned by Yahoo because I would get rate limited and I didn't have a way of surfacing those messages (huzzah opensearch)

What got me out entirely was when I attempted to send an email to a colleague at a random ass no name university and my email was flat out rejected with no way to reach out to the administrators. I wouldn't have cared if it wasn't such a unique project (oil and gas exploration using ML). I have not self hosted email (in earnest) since that day over 10 years ago.