MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by Nextgrid | 2025-10-20 13:51:59+00:00
Most business transactions involve the delivery of some good/service. You will generally know whether you've been scammed or not.

With aid agencies and donations you're often entirely reliant on their word as to whether your donation has actually made it to the cause they claim to support. If they're going to be using deceptive imagery, what else could they be deceptive about?
by rsynnott | 2025-10-20 13:52:14+00:00
> The thing is, the old GlobalFoundries fab has been constructed decades ago. Building something like this from scratch nowadays involves so much more paperwork than back then, it's a massive hurdle to overcome.

The big Bosch fab was built in 2021 (they previously had a smaller one, I think). The latest Intel fab in Ireland was finished in 2023.
by jeroenhd | 2025-10-20 13:52:17+00:00
Matrix allows for unencrypted messages so it's inherently less encrypted than Signal. The federation capability also means messages leak metadata. Furthermore, encrypted messages also contain some metadata in the unencrypted envelope. Some protocol features (emoji reactions) also ended up outside of the encrypted envelope because of that. It's a risk with any protocol that has encryption bolted on and optional.

On the other hand, you can host your own Matrix server and still participate in the network, whereas Signal will have you convince your friends and family to install a custom Signal client if you want to run your own Signal server, for instance because you don't want to rely on Amazon's servers (Signal was down when Amazon went down this morning).

Signal sacrifices network openness for encryption capabilities.

There's also the MLS/MIMI side of things, but AFAIK that work hasn't been completed yet (MIMI isn't even a full RFC yet).

Element/Matrix, with some modifications, has been chosen as the messenger of choice by the French government (Tchap) as well as the German military (BwMessenger, BundesMessenger) and healthcare (TI-Messenger).
by djoldman | 2025-10-20 13:52:32+00:00
Key paragraph:

> However, a small handful of models such as Alibaba’s Qwen and DeepSeek are most popular for inference, with most other models only sporadically called upon. This leads to resource inefficiency, with 17.7 per cent of GPUs allocated to serve only 1.35 per cent of requests in Alibaba Cloud’s marketplace, the researchers found.
by lotsofpulp | 2025-10-20 13:52:36+00:00
This is too simplistic. There are varying levels of trust for myriad interactions.

You can trust someone to drive properly and not hit you.

You can trust someone to not rob you as you walk by them.

You can simultaneously not trust them enough to give them money if they ask for it without sufficient proof. Or not trust them enough to invite them into your home.
by mschuster91 | 2025-10-20 13:52:56+00:00
IAM, hands down, is one of the most amazing pieces of technology there is.

The sheer volume is one thing, but... IAM's policy engine, that's another thing. Up to 5000 different roles per account, dozens of policies that can have an effect on any given user entity and on top of that you can also create IAM policies that blanket affect all entities (or only a filtered subset) in an account, and each policy definition can be what, 10 kB or so, in size. Filters can include multiple wildcards everywhere so you can't go for a fast-path in an in-memory index, and they can run variables with on-demand evaluation as well.

And all of that is reachable not on an account-specific endpoint that could get sharded from a shared instance should the load of one account become too expensive, no, it's a global (and region-shared) endpoint. And if that weren't enough, all calls are shipped off to CloudTrail's event log, always, with full context cues to have an audit and debug trail.

To achieve all that in a service quality that allows for less than 10 seconds worth of time before a change in an IAM policy becomes effective and milliseconds of call time is nothing short of amazing.
by StackBPoppin | 2025-10-20 13:53:00+00:00
I've made a more in depth video showing this mechanic with sound: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uUCB189Om9s

I think sound gives just the right amount of help to get you in the general vicinity of the next clue, without completely giving it away. Of course there could be lower difficulty levels with visual indicators as well.

I will definitely be adding a tutorial since the mechanics are so bizarre. I was also going to add an additional mechanic: it's not just about moving a specific object, but also placing an object within the vicinity of another unknown object.
by rdtsc | 2025-10-20 13:53:00+00:00
> included AI-generated testimony from a Burundian woman describing being raped by three men and left to die in 1993 […] has been taken down, as we believed it shows improper use of AI, and may pose risks regarding information integrity

It’s one thing to create an image but creating a whole fake testimony is even worse.

Notice they just felt that the tool was evolving “too fast” and it didn’t feel real enough. Once the tool is better, they’ll have no issues with fake testimonies.
by nmeofthestate | 2025-10-20 13:53:21+00:00
Explorer in Windows 11 was overhauled, and its address bar behaviour is now absolute garbage. For example, type a directory path into it and press enter - takes 10 seconds to display the contents of the directory. Auto-complete on the address-bar as you type is unusable as it is so slow it's quicker just to type out the entire path manually.

Oh - and the popup UI for volume level and WiFi (and bluetooth etc) causes the system to freeze up sometimes, when you open it.

Logging in and the mouse freezes up for multiple seconds.

I'm sure these are not universal to all machines running Windows 11, but for me it's an all together shoddy user experience, and I'm sure there's a few other headaches that I forgot to mention.
by stinos | 2025-10-20 13:54:06+00:00
> You can't and the correct response is a total lack of trust by default because that's the easiest way to protect yourself.

Rather off-topic, but it's funny how this principle applies in the exact same way when it comes to traffic for instance. It is unfortunate it has to be like that, but not trusting any other traffic and assuming they can at any point do the thing you'd least expect them to do is just safer. Especially when e.g. cycling this saved my from injuries or worse more than just a couple of times. And that's even in a country with relatively high numbers of cyclists.
by aDyslecticCrow | 2025-10-20 13:54:18+00:00
> Going fast enough sideways so you stay up there is the tricky bit.

nah, thats the simple part. getting up there efficiently is the difficulty. once we're up, its just a matter of force over time to create a nice orbit.

The faster you go, the more friction you face, and the more heat and vibration your equipment must endure.

Going slower reduce friction and stress but use more energy just negating gravity. Slow rocket is inefficient rocket.

So we wanna leave the atmosphere as soon as possible, but not so fast that the rocket melts or engines collapse. Prefferably just below the sound barrier.

once we're up, its pretty chill... until you wanna go down again. Slow rocket is alive rocket.
by kmacdough | 2025-10-20 13:54:18+00:00
> But that's something else, that's no longer just OCR ("Optical Character Recognition").

Lines often blur for technologies under such rapid evolution. Not sure it's helpful to nitpick the verbal semantics.

It is a fair question whether the OCR-inspired approach is the correct approach for more complex structured documents where wider context may be important. But saying it's "not OCR" doesn't seem meaningful from a technical perspective. It's an extension of the same goal to convert images of documents into the most accurate and useful digitized form with the least manual intervention.
by kavout | 2025-10-20 13:54:31+00:00
Ever wonder what Nancy Pelosi bought before that big tech rally?

Or why 3 CEOs suddenly bought their own stock right before earnings?

Here's the truth: By the time retail investors hear about a stock on CNBC, the smart money has already moved.

That's why we built Smart Money.

What is it? A real-time intelligence platform that shows you EXACTLY what insiders, Congress members, Wall Street analysts, and billionaire investors are buying and selling—before the broader market catches on.

The secret sauce? Cross-validation.

When a CEO buys shares → Interesting. When 3+ executives buy the same stock → Signal. When insiders are buying AND analysts upgrade with 20%+ targets AND Congress members pile in AND legendary investors open positions → That's your highest-confidence opportunity.

We're tracking: → 10,000+ insiders, analysts & institutional investors → Real-time insider trades (SEC Form 4 filings) → Congressional stock transactions (both parties) → Wall Street analyst upgrades/downgrades → 13F filings from 100+ investment gurus

No more guessing. No more FOMO. Just follow the money.
by notepad0x90 | 2025-10-20 13:55:32+00:00
western is a cultural term derived from a geographic one. The US is also not 'western' strictly geographically as it is not in western europe, neither is australia. But they both originated from Britain's empire and share in it's cultural ancestry. It means "western europe and it's cultural derivatives". Spain and Portugal's empire fell away long before britain and france's and they don't have similar geopolitical relations like NATO, so it's hard to consider their former colonies/upstarts part of the same sphere of cultural influence.

China for sure will catch up, the question is what they will do with it. They're not ambitious like the US/West. The US wanted influence all over the world as an extension of the cold war and to keep economic interests safeguarded. But China just doesn't operate that way. They're more hands-off. They could be opening up alibaba cloud datacenters all over the US, offering it as an AWS/Azure alternative, funding tons of startups all over europe, the US,etc... to exert their influence, but they won't. They have a more long-term low-and-slow approach to global domination. The "100 year marathon" as they called it, which they'll win for sure.

China's greatest weakness is not just their lack of ambition,but their command-economy. They're doing capitalism but with central control of the economy. It intertwines government policy with corporate policy, making it harder to do business overseas (like with bytedance/tiktok).
by Majromax | 2025-10-20 13:55:38+00:00
> When I(short proof)=I(long proof), per-token average surprisal must be lower for the long proof than for the short proof. But since surprisal for a single token is simply -log P, that would mean that, on average, the shorter proof is made out of less probable tokens.

This assertion is intuitive, but it isn't true. Per-token entropy of the long proof can be larger if the long proof is not minimal.

For example, consider the "proof" of "list the natural numbers from 1 to 3, newline-delimited." The 'short proof' is:

"1\n2\n3\n" (Newlines escaped because of HN formatting)

Now, consider the alternative instruction to give a "long proof", "list the natural numbers from 1 to 3, newline-delimited using # for comments. Think carefully, and be verbose." Trying this just now with Gemini 2.5-pro (Google AI Studio) gives me:

"# This is the first and smallest natural number in the requested sequence.\n 1

# Following the first, this is the second natural number, representing the concept of a pair.\n 2

# This is the third natural number, concluding the specified range from 1 to 3.\n 3"

We don't have access to Gemini's per-token logits, but repeating the prompt gives different comments so we can conclude that there is 'information' in the irrelevant commentary.

The author's point regains its truth, however, if we consider the space of all possible long proofs. The trivial 'long' proof has higher perplexity than the short proof, but that's because there are so many more possible long proofs of approximately equal value. The shortest possible proof is a sharp minimum, but and longer proofs are shallower and 'easier'.

The author also misses a trick with:

> Prompted with “Respond only with code: How do you increment i by 1 in Python?”, I compared the two valid outputs: i += 1 has a perplexity of approximately 38.68, while i = i + 1 has a perplexity of approximately 10.88.

… in that they ignore the equally-valid 'i = 1 + i'.
by jamwil | 2025-10-20 13:55:48+00:00
Close but slightly different. As I envision it, the random selection would only be for the pool of candidates. People in the pool would have the option but not the obligation to run and there would still be campaigns and voting as there are now, just with a very narrow slice of the population eligible to run if they choose.

The only goal is to remove politics as a career option, since it is quite improbable that any one person would win the lottery to be eligible. A secondary goal is that a potentially great leader who would not have considered politics under current system’s may well be called to duty if they are drawn into the pool and view themselves as a strong option within the pool.
by segmondy | 2025-10-20 13:55:54+00:00
First pass on my local deepseekv3.1-Terminus at Q4 answered it correctly. if anything, i think LLMs should write terse code, Q/J/APL/Forth/Prolog/Lisp, tokens is precious. It's insane to waste precious tokens generating Java, javascript and other overly verbose code...

https://pastebin.com/VVT74Rp9
by sirn | 2025-10-20 13:55:55+00:00
I usually use `emacsclient -nw` inside a terminal (sometimes over mosh). I've found eat[1] to be much a better than vterm at being a terminal emulator inside Emacs (inside a terminal). It flickers less, and seems to handle key forwarding a lot better. The only downside is it's slightly slower than vterm at handling a large chunk of data (e.g. cat an access log).

[1]: https://codeberg.org/akib/emacs-eat
by goku12 | 2025-10-20 13:56:06+00:00
> But sorry for trying to be helpful. No good deed goes unpunished, as they say.

If that was your intention, I apologize. I misunderstood what you were trying to say. But looking at the score on that comment, I don't think I'm the only one who misunderstood it. These comments may need a bit more effort to avoid this confusion. Meanwhile, please don't take it personally - I wasn't trying to insult or be disrespectful. I was just trying to convey that it was annoying. Anyway, thanks for the pointer! I will check it out.
by rose-knuckle17 | 2025-10-20 13:56:26+00:00
aws had an outage. Many companies were impacted. Headlines around the world blame AWS. the real news is how easy it is to identify companies that have put cost management ahead of service resiliency.

Lots of orgs operating wholly in AWS and sometimes only within us-east-1 had no operational problems last night. Some that is design (not using the impacted services). Some of that is good resiliency in design. And some of that was dumb luck (accidentally good design).

Overall, those companies that had operational problems likely wouldn't have invested in resiliancy expenses in any other deployment strategy either. It could have happened to them in Azure, GCP or even a home rolled datacenter.
by kedean | 2025-10-20 13:56:32+00:00
Think about it from the perspective of a possible benefactor. If they're being lured in with these images at all, there's clearly an emotional element to it. If they start realizing the images weren't real at all, there's a very good chance they will stop donating because you have lied to them. The crux of their support was based on falsehoods.

Personally, I'd prefer donating to an organization that isn't trying to use "sad" images to gut-punch me in the first place. There's a reason the "Arms Of An Angel" ASCPA ads are a laughingstock.
by IAmBroom | 2025-10-20 13:56:34+00:00
Yes, survivorship bias is real, but it's absolutely true that clothes are often made of more delicate fabrics today.

Some of it is fashion-motivated; a shaved leather jacket that has a feel almost like cloth lays very differently on a person than a bomber- or motorcycle-weight jacket.

The rest is because lighter threads are cheaper. And lighter-weight zippers are cheaper.

We won't know if this self-lauded new product is an improvement or not for a while.
by CaptainOfCoit | 2025-10-20 13:56:34+00:00
I agree it's a good thing, but I'd also agree it's not something you need/have to shove in people's faces, especially when it's literally one click away to find out (The GitHub icon in the top right takes you to the repository, and you don't even have to scroll or click anything, the sidebar shows "MIT License" for you).
by uyzstvqs | 2025-10-20 13:56:46+00:00
> So far matrix is the best attempt in my book, but it's also not there (yet?).

IMO XMPP is the best attempt so far, but it's completely outdated by today's standards. Matrix is a modern attempt, but it's just bad. I doubt that Matrix will actually get anywhere usable in the future.

It's absolutely possible to build such a protocol with high performance, seamless UX, Signal's level of privacy and security, and Discord's level of features. It's just a lot of work to actually build the specifications and flagship implementations, compared to just building a good centralized option.
by pessimizer | 2025-10-20 13:57:01+00:00
What people say to respond to this critique is that high-trust people were always a problem. Low-trust societies have procedures in place that nobody ever considers just skipping because we're both good guys and you're from Boston, too, right?

High-trust societies are self-regulating scammers paradises. Filled with people citing Occam's Razor, and affinity fraud. Even worse, for minorities the procedures never get dropped, but they're still expected (pressured) to drop procedures to fit in, so they end up highly unequal societies.
by vinniedkator | 2025-10-20 13:57:22+00:00
To over simplify the process: Budgets in the US are supposed to be revenue neutral. The use of sunset provisions, like the SALT cap, allow Congress to play with the math in order to make it follow its own rules. These provisions are really a gimmick because not extending them before expiration becomes a political problem. I.e. letting the SALT cap expire would “give the rich a tax break”. Note: I’m not arguing the validity of the SALT cap).
by th2o2o3409980f | 2025-10-20 13:57:25+00:00
PLAN International is egregious in doing this kind of stuff.

I've never ever heard of this charity in India, but if you've been to Tokyo these guys have posters of like the worst stereotypes of India you can think of, in order to milk money.

Gutter scum. These NGO scam-artists are half the reason these countries remain poor - it's in their interests that this doesn't change, which is why they NEVER advocate structural change.

Eg. None of these people will talk about caste till the cows come home, but will not utter a single word against the systemic British era policies that exclude the majority of non-Anglophones out of education and ergo a way out of poverty. Almost like they want to ensure that colonial policies that suit them don't go against them.
by IndySun | 2025-10-20 13:57:37+00:00
Thank you.

Spirulina had a moment, and I took it, in the UK in the 90s. I'm struggling to remember exactly why I took it or stopped taking it, but, as a veggie, it did seem to offer everything else I might be lacking in my diet.

As I've aged my digestion is no longer as robust as it was, so I'm keen to give spirulina another go, plus the husks (metamucil is especially good, you think?) for a few months and see if I feel any different.

The removal of heavy metals is a plus, though I also am a little skeptical of how essential removal is, or of the genuine serious long term damage caused. I need to read up more.
by nostrademons | 2025-10-20 13:57:50+00:00
You should be distrustful of every emotion generated by a mass media campaign. They're all artificial, and generated for the benefit of the person running the campaign, not you.

It's still possible to function, it's just that you have to go out and seek information, and usually seek information through channels where the organization is not delivering it to you. Every non-profit files a Form 990 with the IRS, and every public company files a form 10-Q/K with the SEC. There's a wealth of information there for figuring out what the company is doing, but they usually like to obfuscate it in some extremely boring text and financial figures, because they want you to buy into the narrative they deliver to the press and not the facts they deliver to the government. They usually will not outright lie on these, though, because doing so is a crime that can put the CEO, CFO, and Board of Directors in jail.

Same for consumer stuff. Ruthlessly seek out back-channel information about products, whether it's word-of-mouth from friends, online reviews (though these are increasingly easily gamed these days), product tests from independent organizations (though again, many companies provide free products to review in exchange for favorable reviews), etc. I've found that keeping an online subscription to Consumer Reports has been well worth it because they're one of the few review sites where you pay them to review, the company doesn't pay them to get reviewed. Advertisements are worthless; treat them as such. Same goes for random cold calls; it's probably a scam, unless you can corroborate it otherwise.
by metabagel | 2025-10-20 13:58:26+00:00
If we are talking about overweight people, then I think your 95% figure is backwards. Maybe 5% can stick to that regimen without addressing what’s going on between their ears. Likely, your perspective is skewed by the crowd you hang out with or from seeing other people at the gym. That’s not a representative cross-section of the population, particularly with respect to people who are overweight.

The emotional/psychological side is important, because the person must make long term changes in their lifestyle.

People tend to over-eat for a reason, and typically it is a reaction to stress or some emotional/psychological need which isn’t being met.
by Muromec | 2025-10-20 13:59:58+00:00
Doesn't have to involve any AI. I had door-to-door campaigners the other month asking to donate to some charity (probably Red Cross) to help with hunger in Palestine. They haven't meant to shoot at IDF to stop the blockade of aid, just to buy more of it since it was in the news and they needed to top up their budget. That's just how they work.
by IAmBroom | 2025-10-20 14:00:21+00:00
Some of it is very real, and economical.

If your mother has to drop-spindle the flax your father helped gather from the retting pond to make the thread to weave the garment... that tunic better damned-well last several years. In fact, garments were mentioned in estate records of the deceased because they were so valuable.

If you can shop online for a new T-shirt while riding the bus to work, and have it delivered to your door the next day... your children aren't going to hope to inherit it.
by dlisboa | 2025-10-20 14:00:27+00:00
Absolutely. China obviously has a longer history with innovation but they like to make it seem everything was invented by them at some point in the past. I'd say newer technology is where China has had a bigger impact.

Consequently newer tech is precisely where global cooperation is most required so no country can really do it by themselves. We could even say no country, western or otherwise, has been doing it on their own for the past 500 years or so but alas...