MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by nacs | 2025-10-23 02:31:08+00:00
It's nice that they mention node-pty that does most of the heavy lifting for the terminal/pseudo-tty that powers this (VSCode's terminal emulator is powered by the same library).

It looks like they've added a layer on top of node-pty to allow serializing/streaming of the contents to the terminal within the mini-terminal viewports they're allocating for the terminal rendering. I wonder if they're releasing that portion as open source?
by seanhunter | 2025-10-23 02:31:20+00:00
Yes. From a quick scan of the paper, it includes a formal proof in Lean4. That said, it is very long and complicated, with lots of steps in the chain (as you might expect) so it would need to be checked carefully to ensure it proves what it claims to prove.

Lean uses Curry-Howard correspondence, so how proofs work is you declare your propositions as types and then your proof is actually a recipe that goes from things that have already been established and finishes by instantiating that type. The guarantees there are very strong - if you succeed in instantiating the type you have definitely proved something. The question is whether you have proved the thing you said you have. So here scanning the proof (it’s like 100 pages and I am sick so definitely sub-par intellectually) they use category theory to embed the problem, so the proof is actually a proof of the properties of this embedding. So if there is a problem with the proof, my guess would be that it would lie in the embedding not being exactly representative of the problem somehow.

It seems a pretty serious attempt though- it’s not just some random crank paper.
by crazygringo | 2025-10-23 02:32:48+00:00
> "Targeting browsers" is pointless.

Well, there's little for websites to respect if we don't ensure popular commercial browsers have the capability to send the necessary headers, and that these headers actually reflect user choices, even if the corporations behind them don't want to.

So it's not pointless at all. It's rather quite an important half of the equation. How is it going to work at all without that?
by dalyons | 2025-10-23 02:33:39+00:00
I don’t think there is a single new car for sale in the US that doesn’t have an ECU, and a huge amount of digital electronics. Hell, my friends petrol jeep was bricked a few years ago by an overnight software update and had to be towed to a dealership. If they are available without this, new, where you live, feels like that’s on borrowed time. This is the world we live in now

And in that world, where every car is software. EVs are fundamentally simpler, they have less moving parts and no complicated things like engines or transmissions. Less parts, less complexity, less to go wrong.
by righthand | 2025-10-23 02:33:58+00:00
Wait we had the power to incentivize America’s industrial base all along, but the main driver for pushing the industrial base over to China was to extract maximum capital. This has been touted as “consumers want lower prices”. What is stopping this brave marker company from profit maximizing again?

It seems the main argument here is the pandemic and supply chain, even though the author is invoking other modern issues from an attempted bipartisan pov.

They mention tariffs but that’s not going to solve the profit maximization desires and shift the costs, it’s just going to make sharpies more expensive in America.

I mean good for American industrialization that we can make our writing utensils here. It’s just pitched in a weird “not trying to be political (but really am being political)” way.
by Paracompact | 2025-10-23 02:34:06+00:00
> I'm very hopeful that the problem is simply lack of general awareness of these games, and that once there's enough content surrounding them, we'll have a healthy population of people playing more abstract strategy games.

Possibly, but my takeaway from COVID is that games like chess and go (which experienced a bump in popularity during the lockdowns, and have since been dwindling back down) are not merely gems waiting to be rediscovered, but instead appeal to outdated tastes in gaming, and are unlikely to be replicated given market realities. You need approachability for game-one beginners, you need vivid and eye-catching visuals, you need progression systems and content drips to keep players hooked, you need monetization to milk the whales, etc.
by rescrv | 2025-10-23 02:35:22+00:00
Thank you! This is the kind of comment I hoped to see.

I'm betting it was published in a hurry. I know I would hit "publish" within 24 hours of creating such a result, and would hope it would go wide. I'd publish to arxiv before getting clearance to release the code. I bet that's what happened here.

I appreciate your explanation of the Curry-Howard correspondance. I was familiar with it, but not with Lean in particular. I'd heard of Lean, but didn't know how it worked.

Thank you again!
by lukan | 2025-10-23 02:35:27+00:00
" Harry Potter, like Rambo, The Matrix, and Frankenstein, supplies metaphors and narratives through which nearly everyone today interprets the world around them, even if they haven't read it themselves"

I did read the books, but I don't think I have really encountered the use of "Muggles, horcrux, mudblood" in every day life, nor do I personally feel they shaped my metaphors or narratives on how I see the world. Frankenstein is much more catchy for the metaphor of the man made monster for example. What does Harry Potter stands for?
by yellowapple | 2025-10-23 02:35:30+00:00
> In place of phone projection, GM is working to update its current Android-powered infotainment implementation with a Google Gemini-powered assistant and an assortment of other custom apps, built both in-house and with partners.

I guess I'll add that to the ever-growing list of reasons why I'll never buy a GM vehicle manufactured in the current century.
by almostgotcaught | 2025-10-23 02:35:43+00:00
Lol that he has a PhD? So either you think

1. The fact that he cheated his way into Stanford is completely irrelevant when considering whether he cheated his way into Caltech

or

2. No dummies graduate PhD programs, even T10 PhD programs, just like no dummies are admitted to T10 BS programs

or both.

I hope you understand that one or both of these perspectives is either the height of naivety or more of that backbending work I was talking about before.
by CuriouslyC | 2025-10-23 02:35:49+00:00
Engineering is a game of tradeoffs. Time is one of the things you have to trade off, given your strong opinions I expect this is something you've been in the industry long enough to understand intuitively.

Regarding proof, if you have contracts for your software write them up. Gherkin specs, api contracts, unit tests, etc. If you care about performance, add stress tests with SLOs. If you care about code organization create custom lint rules. There are so many ways to take yourself out of the loop rigorously so you can spend your time more efficiently.
by kcplate | 2025-10-23 02:35:51+00:00
Yes, but it’s also a poor analogy in the sense that AI hasn’t replaced one of the best of the best but has easily surpassed the playing capabilities of every fair, average, and above average player out there.

I am not worried about AI replacing the best of the best any time soon, I’m worried about it replacing the fair to middling…relatively soon.
by anon373839 | 2025-10-23 02:36:00+00:00
> But I'm also growingly sympathetic to the idea that telling people they are, in fact, traumatized, is not healthy

If the message is, "you are traumatized and therefore permanently damaged", you're right - that's not healthy and also not true. But if the message is "you are traumatized and need to process your trauma", then it's more like telling someone that they have a treatable injury. I think this a pretty critical distinction that rarely gets addressed in these kinds of discussions.
by krapp | 2025-10-23 02:36:33+00:00
To be fair, I think McDonald's makes more money on real estate (renting franchise locations) than they do selling food, and the income from data mining customers would probably be a pittance in comparison to both.

Not that I'd put it past them, but I assume the entire point of the Monopoly campaign is advertising, playing on the nostalgia for the original, and that the app is just there because that's what you do now, you just have an app.
by blooalien | 2025-10-23 02:36:56+00:00
> Using heroic and wine is so seamless that I don't even remember if I have been running a game natively or not. It just works.

If you're using Heroic on Linux, then there's no question whether you're running games natively or not. You are running a Windows game in WINE (or Proton, a WINE fork). Epic Store doesn't carry any Linux native games (even when a native Linux version exists).
by add-sub-mul-div | 2025-10-23 02:37:32+00:00
My car has no screens and neither will my next one. I can't cut the tech giants out of my life altogether but I'm reducing my reliance on them, not increasing their use cases where I don't need to. I'm not inviting them into my driving, my purchases, my music listening, my reading, or any other part of my life. Good for GM.
by vlovich123 | 2025-10-23 02:37:55+00:00
> A VMM that swaps out to disk an allocated page to make room for more disk cache would be braindead

Claiming any decision is “brain dead” in something as heuristic heavy and impossible to compute optimally as resident memory pages is quite the statement to make; this is a form of the knapsack problem (NP-complete at least) with the added benefit of time where the items are needed in some specific indeterminate order in the future and there’s a whole bunch of different workloads and workload permutations that alter this.

To drive this point home in case you disagree, what’s dumber? Swapping out to disk an allocated page (from the kernel’s perspective) that’s just sitting in the free list of the userspace allocator for that process or a page of some frequently accessed page of data?

Now, I agree that VMMs may not do this because it’s difficult to come up with these kinds of scenarios that don’t penalize the general case, more importantly than performance this has to be a mechanism that is explainable to others and understandable for them. But claiming it’s a braindead option to even consider is IMHO a bridge too far.
by 0xbadcafebee | 2025-10-23 02:38:07+00:00
The scripts from my junk drawer (https://github.com/peterwwillis/junkdrawer) I use every day are 'kd' and 'gw', which use the Unix dialog command to provide an easy terminal UI for Kubectl and Git Worktrees (respectively)... I probably save 15+ minutes a day just flitting around in those UIs. The rest of the scripts I use for random things; tasks in AWS/Git/etc I can never remember, Terraform module refactoring, Bitbucket/GitHub user management, Docker shortcuts, random password generation, mirroring websites with Wget, finding duplicate files, etc.
by quuxplusone | 2025-10-23 02:39:00+00:00
That just sounds like Anno Mundi with extra steps. :)

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

1. Pick an epoch date so far in the past that nothing of interest could possibly have taken place before it.

2. ???

3. Profit!

The two problems with this idea are, first, that everyone argues about the exact value of the epoch; and second, that something always ends up having happened before that.

You can also invert the scheme, to get the Before Present system. This has the same two problems (s/before/after/).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Before_Present
by bpodgursky | 2025-10-23 02:39:23+00:00
The articles are stupid. It's up to $1T IF he raises the stock price ~7x.

It's basically the board saying "uh, sure, if you earn us 8.5 trillion dollars, we'll give you a trillion of it".

It's an absurdly high bar, and the board had no real incentive to not throw it out there. Honestly every board should do this. Why not.
by ggm | 2025-10-23 02:39:25+00:00
Such an amazing "the road not taken" backstory. I worked (as a user) on several of the workstations mentioned in the ns32000 wiki page. They were lovely, bespoke styling, a delight to sit at.

Motorola just had better time-to-market.

The FPGA project looks very pleasing. This could be a whitechapel workstation, or an early postscript engine as well as a NetBSD or bbc micro/acorn device.
by ChuckMcM | 2025-10-23 02:39:27+00:00
Yeah, and you want to explain to future generations why we could have had a happy relationship with Mars but no, we gave it a really bad yeast infection and now it never wants us anywhere near it? Hmmm? :-)

I heard an interesting speculative talk about why we should be putting hard microbes on every planet and moon in our solar system because we'll probably cause an extinction event and perhaps the other celestial body could get a head start on evolving a better form of intelligence.
by all2 | 2025-10-23 02:41:06+00:00
A chapter of ARM is a really good bet. All you have to do is check their website and show up to a public event and introduce yourself. Lend a hand with setup and teardown.

A church might be a bit of a reach. A man of God (not a pastor, unless he is ex military/cop/etc or was in the trades) might be able to advise you, but if you aren't Christian I don't think it'll be super helpful.
by president_zippy | 2025-10-23 02:41:06+00:00
I saw the follow-up responses complaining about you soliciting, but I've got no problem with you offering to solve a problem and being remunerated for it.

However, my lab is a brokedick operation with barely enough cash reserves to pay staff salaries. We sincerely do not have the budget to buy new software, especially after the NIH funding cuts.
by AlotOfReading | 2025-10-23 02:41:23+00:00
It's possible, but it wouldn't lead to this kind of action. Automakers already have a way to deal with expensive features that are critical to a large segment of the customer base. They limit it to higher trims or select models, depending on the cost constraints. That's what GM does with ADAS for example.

They're eliminating phone projection entirely here, which means they think the feature is incompatible with their business model.
by esafak | 2025-10-23 02:41:24+00:00
Hacker: That's not the point. Look at Latin. Hardly anybody knows that now. Humphrey: Tempora mutantur, nos et mutamur in illis. Hacker: What? Humphrey: Times change and we change with the times. Hacker: Precisely. Humphrey: Si tacuisses, philosophus manisses. Hacker: What does that mean? Humphrey: If you'd kept your mouth shut, we might have thought you were clever. Hacker: I beg your pardon? Humphrey: Not you, Prime Minister. That's the translation.

https://youtu.be/beuKfLn8a6c?t=96
by next_xibalba | 2025-10-23 02:41:26+00:00
It's almost entirely milestone/incentive based. Should Tesla continue on this trajectory, he won't see a dime. Tesla has to hit an $8 trillion market cap, deliver 20 million vehicles, and 1 million robotaxis, and $400 billion in adjusted earnings. Were Tesla to hit those numbers in the specified time frame, Musk's comp would be worth every penny to investors.
by crazygringo | 2025-10-23 02:41:58+00:00
> They are directly calling you a scammer and "attacker".

No they're not. The word "scammer" does not appear. They're saying attackers on the site and they use the word "might".

This includes third-party hackers who have compromised the site.

They never say the owner of the site is the attacker.

I'm quite sure their lawyers have vetted the language very carefully.
by nikolay | 2025-10-23 02:42:05+00:00
Well, I get impressive results with Kiro [0] by AWS. It's specs-based but takes a lot longer than just generating a whole working program with a single prompt. GitHub has their Spec Kit [1] and there's OpenSpec [2] now, so, things will get better.

[0]: https://kiro.dev/

[1]: https://github.com/github/spec-kit

[2]: https://openspec.dev/
by svieira | 2025-10-23 02:42:32+00:00
> He is both things in the same way at the same time

Not quite. He has a divine nature and a human nature. There is only one person, two natures, analogous to one person two job titles. He has both natures, fully.

> Did he die or didn't he?

Having two natures, he can experience things that people without two natures cannot experience. Like the experience of death in His human nature that in no way affected His divine nature (analogous to "experiencing censure as a judge, but still being able to practice medicine"). Fortunately, death isn't a cessation of human nature, merely an interrupting of part of its actuality (that is, an evil). You and I will still possess a human nature after we die. Just as we both would possess a human nature if we lost part of our bodies, we still possess a human nature after we lose our bodies completely in death.
by tombert | 2025-10-23 02:43:56+00:00
I needed my wife's help lugging a TV into my house from the sidewalk to the living room a few weeks ago. She wasn't out even fifteen minutes, and she got at least twenty separate mosquito bites on her legs.

For whatever reason, mosquitos almost never bite me. I don't know if it's just because I'm pretty hairy, or if I have the gene that makes me less appealing to them, but I am thankful every day that I don't have to deal with it.
by swamiji | 2025-10-23 02:44:38+00:00
Specification driven design has been around for a long time. Lets see if AI can make it come true. Dr. David Parnas wrore about Parnas Tables https://research.cs.queensu.ca/home/cisc323/2006w/slides/Bil... ; and then there was Eiffel with Design-By-Contract; and the Type System in F-Sharp seems like magic.
by TGower | 2025-10-23 02:44:39+00:00
Very hard to take this article seriously when they claim the Model Y was just released this month when it actually came out in 2020. "Tesla also debuted a long-promised, cheaper sedan called the Model Y earlier this month in a bid to increase slumping sales. The new line of sedans received criticism from some analysts over its starting prices of $39,990 and $36,990 – significantly higher than Chinese low-cost competitors." Also the claimed "Rush to buy electric vehicles" put revenue only 2% above expectations?
by horsawlarway | 2025-10-23 02:44:53+00:00
I agree, the classifications are pretty solid when followed and I'm with you on class 2 being the right pick for most people - But I'd argue they're too complicated.

I think it's also a social issue right now, there's very little general information provided to bikers (ex - most people don't even know these classifications exist, and can't remember them if they do), and not a large enough chunk of the population is biking yet to get a general consensus on "acceptable" behavior.

Couple that with low enforcement, and it makes sense a fair number of people are just clueless.

---

Just simple things like "bike speed limit" signs on trails/paths would probably help a lot.

I have a class 3 ebike, and I'd still 100% prefer to ride it on a trail with a speed limit of 20mph instead of having trying to mingle with cars on even moderatly busy streets.

The laws should let bikers understand the desired behavior, and allow them to self-regulate.

Especially given that this isn't in the same risk category as larger vehicles (e-bikes are half the weight of mopeds, and 28mph is very different than 45)

Then give folks tickets. They're too useful to go away - we'll get it figured out.
by Moru | 2025-10-23 02:45:14+00:00
It's not completely true that the mosquitos don't carry things here. We do have something called Tularemia [1] (Harpest). Also it seems the first mosquitos for the season are more potent that later during the year.

And for personal anecdotal evidence, my wife gets more problems with mosquitos here than I do. When we visit her home country I get more problems than she does.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tularemia
by seanhunter | 2025-10-23 02:45:40+00:00
Natural proofs are a certain type of proof of the circuit complexity of boolean conditions. The barrier is that it has been proved that [1] natural proofs cannot be used for P vs NP.

I’m not sure that is a problem here given that as I understand it, natural proofs apply to circuit complexity approaches and they say the whole circuit complexity method has fundamental limitations which they describe thus:

The circuit complexity approach seeks to establish lower bounds by proving that NP problems require super-polynomial circuit sizes. While achieving success for restricted models such as monotone circuits, this approach has faced insurmountable barriers in establishing non-linear lower bounds for general circuits.

So they take an entirely different approach using category theory. It may have a similar limitation as the natural proof barrier (as far as I know), but as they dismiss the whole circuit idea and do something different I wouldn’t say them not mentioning the limitation of a specific type of circuit-based approach is that much of a problem.

[1] assuming certain things which people generally believe to be true
by JumpCrisscross | 2025-10-23 02:47:20+00:00
> Climate has absolutely nothing to do with this discovery

That’s difficult to conclude. It could have everything to do with warming North Atlantic ocean winds. Where they were previously deadly to mosquitoes, now they might not be.

We have insufficient evidence either way. The article is wrong conclude as it did. But it’s equally wrong to conclude based on their mistake that the opposite is true.
by mannykannot | 2025-10-23 02:47:42+00:00
If I'm following you correctly, you are saying that the conclusion of Chalmers' parody is actually correct, as having a recipe is indeed not sufficient to successfully bake a cake: you will not succeed without the ingredients, for example.

This is indeed true, but we should bear in mind that Chalmers' parody is just that: a parody, not a rigorous argument. It seems clear that, if Chalmers wanted to make it more rigorous, he would have concluded with something like "therefore, even if you have all the prerequisites for baking a cake (ingredients, tools, familiarity with basic cooking operations...), no recipe is sufficient to instruct you in successfully completing the task." This would be a better argument, but a flabbier, less to-the-point parody, and it is reasonable for Chalmers to leave it to his readers to get his point.
by strken | 2025-10-23 02:47:47+00:00
In the past I've used batches of data, inserted into a separate table with all the constraints turned off and using UNNEST, and then inserted into the final table once it was done. We ended up both batching the data and using UNNEST because it was faster but it still let us resume midway through.

We probably should have been partitioning the data instead of inserting it twice, but I never got around to fixing that.

COPY is likely a better option if you have access to the host, or provider-specific extensions like aws_s3 if you have those. I'm sure a data engineer would be able to suggest a better ETL architecture than "shove everything into postgres", too.
by alwa | 2025-10-23 02:48:26+00:00
I do this too. I suspect it may involve a subtly different mechanism from the saccade itself though? If the saccade is the behavior, and per the eyewiki link skimming is a voluntary type of saccade, there’s still the question of what leads me to use that behavior when I read (and others to read more linearly). Although you could certainly watch my eyes “saccade” around as I move nonlinearly through a passage, I’m not sure it’s out of a lack of control.

Rather, I feel like I absorb written meaning in units closer to paragraphs than to words or sentences. I’d describe my rapid up-and-down, back-and-forth eye motions as something closer to going back to soak up more, if that makes sense. To reinterpret it in the context of what came after it. The analogy that comes to mind is to a Progressive JPEG getting crisper as more loads.

That eyewiki entry was really cool. Among the unexpectedly interesting bits:

> The initiation of a saccade takes about 200 milliseconds[4]. Saccades are said to be ballistic because the movements are predetermined at initiation, and the saccade generating system cannot respond to subsequent changes in the position of the target after saccade initiation[4].