MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by falcor84 | 2025-10-08 13:22:04+00:00
I appreciated the historical context, but was disappointed that it seemed to fizzle to nothing at the end, just circling around "Urban warfare is messy; bummer". I mean, I was hoping that it could offer at least the basics of a strategy for any of Russia, Ukraine, Hamas or Israel to achieve a decisive victory, but couldn't find any. My mind kept yelling "What would Clausewitz do in this situation?" but left at empty-handed as I was at the start.

It actually had the gall to finish with:

> Clausewitz offers no checklist for success in cities, but rather something more valuable. What he offers is a way to think clearly ...

I'm pretty sure that a checklist for success would have been more valuable.
by gantengx | 2025-10-08 13:22:05+00:00
Ah we're pretty similar in that regard. Officially their screen time is 30min on weekdays (excluding the app usage and chess.com) so the app basically digitise that whiteboard + timer concept

Photo proof actually was my wife's idea. She wanted to verify the task quality when she wasn't at home - similar to your audit capability

I guess the 12year old battles will be coming for me next.. Not exactly looking forward to the puberty haha
by zamadatix | 2025-10-08 13:22:10+00:00
std::format in C++20 is just for the string manipulation half but you still left shift cout by the resulting string to output text in canonical C++.

C++23 introduced std::print(), which is more or less the modernized printf() C++ probably should have started with and also includes the functionality of std::format(). Unfortunately, it'll be another 10 years before I can actually use it outside of home projects... but at least it's there now!
by incomingpain | 2025-10-08 13:22:16+00:00
54% YTD on gold.

31% YTD on bitcoin.

The question is which fiat currency is coming crashing down. Must be a major one.

>Normally I pay little attention to gold prices

Krugman... an economist doesnt pay attention to gold prices? When you go to market watch, it's the first thing it shows you when after hours. It isn't the full story anymore, but it was a leading indicator. This is a huge indictment of Krugman.

>Do you really think gold bars would help you navigate a Fallout-type post-apocalyptic landscape?

Gold is an anti-fiat. Krugman must know this; he's intentionally being dishonest. It's like owning fine art or supercars that sit in a garage. The rest of the blog is just meandering dishonesty.

Lets try to figure out the crashing fiat.

When you go to check each currency. They are all weakening. USD, Euro, Brit are converging. CAD is doing ok, surprisingly.

It would seem to me it's the turkish lira. Something happened in about 2021 and Turkey's Lira has been crashing since. They are buying a ton of gold though. Same with China, USA, India, Poland, etc.

The context: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkish_economic_crisis_(2018%...

So what happened in 2021? The digital turkish lira. They are switching over to their CBDC and it'll be gold backed?
by mallowdram | 2025-10-08 13:22:26+00:00
Narrowing the concept of what a task is at this age is extremely damaging and limiting to experience.

Naming sequences as "tasks" is tantamount to enslavement into an order of roboticism. This sounds like the beginning of a Bradbury story in which children revolt en masse.

Pretty rude? The entire approach here aimed at kids is beyond rude. It's mind-control.

“A growing body of evidence has found that children’s brains can structurally and functionally change due to prolonged media multitasking, such as diminished gray matter in the prefrontal cortex, where attentional control and complex decision making abilities reside, among other really important skills, like the development of empathy and understanding nonverbal social communication,”
by reactordev | 2025-10-08 13:22:30+00:00
On a RPi I can control more aspects than I can a mini pc ITX board. I can boot straight to my program. I can write directly to frame buffers. I don’t need Linux. I don’t really need a kernel…

Here are some examples of where an RPi outshines a mini-PC (though one can still achieve the same results, just putting the box outside the box):

Coffee table Digital Touch map.

Weather Station powered by a solar panel and a LiPo battery.

ADSB receiver also powered by solar and a battery.

Arcade Cabinet that sits on a bar top with a bill reader.

Mini JukeBox at the local hacker space.

Sailing autopilot using NMEA2000 connectors.

Wearables.

Playing with high density distributed computing. (More than 5 machines)

Where the mini pc really shines is:

Storage. (NAS included)

Media PC (TV sold separately)

Gaming Console

Personal Cloud (docker + nfs + caddy + <insert personalized preferences>)

General Autopilot (sensors that need GPU support).

You have left over old PCs and don’t want to open your wallet…
by shafyy | 2025-10-08 13:22:31+00:00
This is true, but it started way earlier than AI with software development though. A lot of software developers' job is just being ticket monkies, adding small things or fixing bugs for a huge company that nobody cares about. The alienation is real.

This is, of course, an attribute of capitalism.

Like carpenters, gardeners and farmers, there are very few software developers who truly have the luxury to treat their work as a craft and not a factory output.
by discomrobertul8 | 2025-10-08 13:22:32+00:00
if the language or std lib already allows for chaining then pipes aren't as attractive. They're a much nicer alternative when the other answer is nested function calls.

e.g.

So this:

take(sorted(filter(map(xs, x => x \* 2), x => x > 4)), 5)

To your example:

xs |> map(x => x \* 2) |> filter(x => x > 4) |> sorted() |> take(5)

is a marked improvement to me. Much easier to read the order of operations and which args belong to which call.
by h4ny | 2025-10-08 13:22:43+00:00
GGP's sentiment resonates with me. I invest a fair bit of time into LLMs to keep up on how †hings are evolving and I do throw both small and large tasks at them. I'm seeing great results with some small task but with anything that is remotely close to actual engineering I just can't get satisfactory results.

My largest project is a year old, it's full-stack JavaScript, and I consciously use patterns, structures, and diligently add documentations right from the beginning for the code base to be as LLM friendly as possible.

I see great results on refactoring with limited scope, scaffolding test cases (I still choose to write my own tests but LLMs can also generate very good tests if I explicitly point to existing tests of highly related code, such as some repository methods), documenting functions, etc. but I'm just not seeing the kind of quality that people claim that LLMs can do for them on complex tasks.

I want to believe that LLMs are actually capable of doing what at least a good junior engineer can do but I'm not seeing that in my own experience. Whenever we point out these issues we are encountering, we just basically get the "git gud" response with no practical details on what we can actually dp to get the results that people claim to be getting. Then people start blaming our lack of structures, patterns, problems with our prompts, the language, our stack, etc. when we complain about the "git gud" response being too vague. Nobody claiming to be seeing great results seems to want to do a comprehensive write-up or, better still, a stream of their entire workflow to teach others how to do actual, good engineering with LLMs on real-world problems either -- they all just want to give high level details and assert success.

On top of that, the fact that none of the people I know in engineering working in both large organizations and respectable startups that are pushing AI are seeing that kind of results naturally makes me even more skeptical of claims of success. What I'm often hearing from them are mediocre engineers thinking that they are being productive but actually just offloading the work to their colleagues through review, and nobody seems to be seeing tangible returns from using AI in their workflow but people in C-suites are pushing AI anyway.

If just about anything can be "your fault", how can anyone claiming that LLMs are great for real engineering without showing evidence be so confident that what they're claiming but not showing is actually the case.

I feel like every time I comment on anything related to your blog posts I probably came across as belligerent and get down voted but I really don't intend to.
by John23832 | 2025-10-08 13:23:04+00:00
I never understood this. The customer type that wants to run an NAS is technically capable. They may choose to run a all-in-one NAS like those from Synology or are ubiquity because of the convenience but if you then make it inconvenient for them by adding these unnecessary hard drive restrictions, they can just as easily go to either another provider or run their own.

Talk about not knowing your customer.
by twoquestions | 2025-10-08 13:23:16+00:00
People keep comparing LLMs to automated looms, but I find them more comparable to cruise control than autopilot.

I've been working on a character sheet application for a while, and decided to vibe-code it with Spec-kit to help me write up a specification, and for things I know it's been great. I tried using Claude to make it into a PWA (something I don't know very well) as an experiment, and I've found the nanosecond the model strays out of my experience and knowledge everything goes straight to Hell. It wraps my codebase around a tree as if I'm not paying attention while driving.

It's a tool you'll have to learn to use, but I can say with absolute confidence it's no replacement for actual skills, if anything it highlights the gulf between people who know what they're doing and people who don't, for better and worse. It sacrifices some of the 'code under your fingers' feeling for management tasks, which I personally really like, as I've always wanted to document/test/code review/spec things out better, and I now understand the pain of people who'd rather not do that sort of thing.

https://github.com/github/spec-kit
by Lerc | 2025-10-08 13:24:13+00:00
Those seem like particularly bad reasons. I'm not sure if they are the arguments that the author has been given or if that's what he perceived those arguments to be.

My take on it is to remember that the people you are talking to are real people with reasons for doing things. Very few people do things that they think are wrong at the time of doing them.

I would guess that the single most common cause of bad faith arguments comes from people jumping to the conclusion that the person they are dealing with is acting in bad faith.

Reflecting on it some more perhaps you can boil it down to the implications of dealing with real people.

If you don't act with empathy you can hurt people. Is it your intention to hurt people?

If it turns out your motivation is, in fact, to hurt people then the issue isn't empathy but your own motivations. Reflecting on your motivations and what you feel like you should be doing as a person is the path to take here.
by foofoo12 | 2025-10-08 13:24:42+00:00
Sadly there's a lot of truth there. Generally it's a bad idea to lend tools to people that don't know how to use them. I don't lend my tools to friends, although I make exceptions when I 100% trust the guy. This is based on experience.

But I'm happy to help, either by me going there or the friend bringing his stuff to my workshop.
by bayindirh | 2025-10-08 13:24:49+00:00
While I have no problems with indentation based syntax, it's not very conductive to minimization, so it's a no go for JSON's case.

Coloring things is a luxury, and from my understanding not many people understand that fact. When you work at the trenches you see a lot of files on a small viewport and without coloring most of the time. Being able to parse an squiggly file on a monochrome screen just by reading is a big plus for the file format in question.

As technology progresses we tend to forget where we came from and what are the fallbacks are, but we shouldn't. Not everyone is seeing the same file in a 30" 4K/8K screen with wide color gamut and HDR. Sometimes a 80x24 over some management port is all we have.
by poszlem | 2025-10-08 13:25:09+00:00
This is the kind of story that perfectly captures why “open source” != “freedom.” You can run 100% FOSS software and still be completely imprisoned if you give control to a middleman.

The company in this story didn’t just sell “support”, they sold permission. They took something open, wrapped it in contracts, lock-ins, and managed-service handcuffs, and then claimed ownership of it. That’s the new vendor lock-in model: control the interface, not the code.

The chilling part isn’t that they could read customer emails, it’s that they thought it was normal. Somewhere between “managed service” and “surveillance,” the moral line vanished, replaced by legalese.

This story should be printed and taped above every government IT procurement desk. If you don’t own your servers, your keys, and your contracts, you don’t own your data, no matter how “open” the stack is.
by DoctorOetker | 2025-10-08 13:25:37+00:00
You are correct that N2O is the "nitro" afterburner used in different systems.

But the reaction 2 N2O => 2 N2 + O2 is very exothermic, in fact it is explosive (but not in the burning sense, since its autodecomposition). However adding a small amount of ethanol makes N2O stable so that sudden shocks or compressions don't result in initiating autodecomposition or explosion.

To power an engine one doesn't necessarily need to burn, or a redox reaction to happen, the reaction just needs to be exothermic and N2O is very exothermic.
by lobsterthief | 2025-10-08 13:25:51+00:00
I don’t think it’s a cartel per se; that would require collusion to keep ink prices high.

What seems to have happened with the 2D printer market is a race to the bottom to provide customers with the cheapest printers possible while hiding the high [recouped] costs of the ink. Many consumers are duped into buying a cheap printer and not realizing the high cost of printing that comes with it.

This is why brands like Brother have been able to succeed, especially pushing their laser printers: higher upfront hardware cost and cheaper ink.
by makeitdouble | 2025-10-08 13:26:00+00:00
There is a time span between the policy is comitted internally and the time that policy is reverted. In Synology's case it's probably more than half a year, in other companies it could take a full year or more to reverse course.

Half a year is plenty enough to move away.

Of course people don't like looking for a new job, but they don't like shitty leadership either. And speaking of paying the bills, you won't get much of a bonus or promotion when profits are plunging, so moving away earlier than later is usually a good idea.
Show HN: On-Device TTS with Synchronized Text Highlighting in the Browser
by OfflineSergio | 2025-10-08 13:26:00+00:00
We built a tool that lets you turn any public webpage into audio with synchronized text highlighting — directly in your browser.

No servers, no limits, no subscriptions. It’s free and works entirely on your device.

How it works: - Take any URL and add "with.audio/" to the beginning - Example: "with.audio/https://example.com/article" - Open it in your browser, wait for the paragraphs to load, then click play - The text-to-speech happens locally in your browser tab, with highlighting

The first time you try it, your browser will download a voice model (Kokoro ~300MB, Piper is lighter). After that, it works offline and almost instantly (depending on the device).

If you like to read a bit about how it works, take a look at this: https://blog.with.audio/posts/web-reader-tts

Note: we send the your URL to our backend to get the HTML content.

Would love your feedback — what works well for you, and what feels rough?
Show HN: Mirrow – Build SVGs with TypeScript, get syntax checking for free
by era37 | 2025-10-08 13:26:10+00:00
Mirrow is a TypeScript DSL that compiles to SVG with compile-time syntax checking and type safety. It reduces boilerplate while catching SVG errors before runtime. Key features:

Attribute validation at compile time Inline events (on:click, @hover) Zero-config CLI: npx mirrow -i input.mirror -o output.svg Works as static SVGs or components

Playground: https://mirrow.app/playground GitHub: https://github.com/MirrowApp/mirrow Built this because hand-writing SVG is error-prone and existing tools don't catch mistakes until runtime. Would love feedback on DX and docs!
Show HN: AI code reviewer that analyzes cross-module impacts
by Jet_Xu | 2025-10-08 13:26:16+00:00
Hey HN! I'm Jet, building LlamaPReview.

Most AI code reviewers only see the diff. They miss the real risks: a function rename that breaks 5 other files, a dependency change that shifts your architecture, a "small" PR that actually rewrites your auth logic.

We built a context retrieval engine that pulls in related code from across the repo before analysis. On complex PRs, it auto-generates Mermaid diagrams showing cross-file impacts.

Technical challenges: 1. Deciding which files are "related" without analyzing the entire repo every time (we use code graphs + call chains + git history) 2. Fitting it into LLM context limits (we rank by relevance and truncate aggressively) 3. Auto-detecting when to trigger deep analysis vs fast review (~35% of PRs end up needing it)

It's live now, free for all public repos. For private repos, we're trying to figure out a sustainable model: first 3 PRs get deep analysis free, then you choose between our always-free basic tier or a paid tier with persistent code knowledge graphs.

The controversial part: to do deep analysis well, we need to build a knowledge graph of your codebase (classes, methods, call chains). For private repos, this means storing structural metadata. Some teams are fine with this. Others want zero-knowledge architecture where even metadata is encrypted client-side.

Questions for HN: 1. What signals would YOU use to detect "this PR is complex enough to need deep analysis"? 2. Would you pay for code review tooling, and if so, what's your threshold? 3. Is storing structural metadata (no code content) acceptable, or is Zero-knowledge Storage the only way?

Site: https://jetxu-llm.github.io/LlamaPReview-site/

I'm here for the next few hours to answer technical questions or get roasted for my monetization strategy.
by layer8 | 2025-10-08 13:26:22+00:00
Here is the updated KB article (note “en-us” vs. “en-global”): https://kb.synology.com/en-us/DSM/tutorial/Drive_compatibili...

In particular: “At the same time, with the introduction of DSM 7.3, 2025 DiskStation Plus series models offer more flexibility for installing third-party HDDs and 2.5" SATA SSDs when creating storage pools. While Synology recommends using drives from the compatibility list for optimal performance and reliability, users retain the flexibility to install other drives at their own discretion.”

NASCompares confirms that no warnings are shown: https://www.reddit.com/r/synology/comments/1o1a32m/testing_s...

I agree that the information is still a bit muddled right now.
by NickC25 | 2025-10-08 13:26:24+00:00
>Typically smart people arent limited to specific areas of being smart. That's kind of the definition of being smart is figuring things out.

Having worked with everyone over the course of my life from PhDs to construction workers, I'm going to have to hard disagree on this one. Just because someone is gifted in one area, does not mean their intelligence or domain expertise applies everywhere. Domain expertise is a real thing.

It's about maximizing your potential, and being in the best environment to do so. Building up that capacity might sound nice in theory, but in practice, you go where you can to get the best results possible.
by taylodl | 2025-10-08 13:26:36+00:00
This paragraph explains the problem:

So when a user wants to remove a CAS-addressed document, before really deleting it you need to detect if it's the last reference. This is not easy to do, it is in fact much harder to do correctly than eating the cost of storing duplicate files.

And this paragraph is the purported solution:

And usually when CAS is considered as a solution, it's to solve the need of deduplicating files to save on storage. But even there, the good solution is to give files their own internal uuids as storage keys, store its hash alongside, and generate external uuids for each file upload, then use refcounts to handle the final delete.

The problem is this solution reframes the problem but doesn't solve it. It still requires:

- Accurate reference counting

- Careful handling of deletes

- Synchronization across systems

Which is all part of the original problem.

At the end of the day, you can't safely and scalably do distributed deletes with refcounts unless you centralize the operation, which kills scalability. There are work-arounds, such as marking the file as unreferenced and then running a garbage collector to delete unreferenced files, but the author doesn't discuss them.
by voidhorse | 2025-10-08 13:27:21+00:00
I get the impetus behind the term and I think it's a good article with a lot of practical advice overall, however I am disheartened by the terminology on two fronts:

1. It is confusing in the sense that all other engineering disciplines have the form "<X> engineering" where X is the object being engineered. This makes it sound like we are engineering vibes, not software. 2. Software engineering was already only marginally worthy of the term "engineering". There is a strong subset of computational system building that I think actually meets the standard of engineering (rigorously understanding requirements and system bounds, probably showing that the system achieves stability within those bounds). This just makes that situation worse. The devil is in the details, and over-reliance on llms ultimately makes those details a black box to the designer. Before you claim it's the same as when a designer relies on a suite of humans—no. The designer can ask those humans for reverentially transparent proofs that certain conditions are upheld, there is a social accountability structure, etc etc all of which does not exist with LLMs even if they get good enough that we can just trust them.

If we are going to keep calling software construction engineering, can we please at least get industry wide standards around ethics before we go off vibing? There's so much that we still sorely need in order to really make this discipline rigorous and socially accountable in the first place.
by bonquesha99 | 2025-10-08 13:27:27+00:00
If you're interested in the Ruby language too, check out this PoC gem for an "operator-less" syntax for pipe operations using regular blocks/expressions like every other Ruby DSL.

https://github.com/lendinghome/pipe_operator#-pipe_operator

"https://api.github.com/repos/ruby/ruby".pipe do URI.parse Net::HTTP.get JSON.parse.fetch("stargazers_count") yield_self { |n| "Ruby has #{n} stars" } Kernel.puts end #=> Ruby has 15120 stars [9, 64].map(&Math.pipe.sqrt) #=> [3.0, 8.0] [9, 64].map(&Math.pipe.sqrt.to_i.to_s) #=> ["3", "8"]
by rimunroe | 2025-10-08 13:27:32+00:00
No, of course not. Why would they? It’s not trying to explain what Easter eggs are in general, nor is it acting like Swifties coined the term. The article is trying to explain that in the context of Taylor Swift, easter eggs are usually about upcoming projects or such things.

The article could have said “‘Easter egg’ is a term which means a bit of information or a feature which is left hidden as a surprise for people to find. In the context of Taylor Swift, easter eggs are hidden bits of information which often point at upcoming projects.” That would be overly wordy and unnecessary though because most people already know what Easter eggs are and thus won’t assume it’s claiming that Swifties invented the term.