MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by looofooo0 | 2025-10-16 09:04:08+00:00
George Eliava Institute in Tbilisi is where you could get such a treatment. In the West you might be able to source it from food production related suppliers: https://phageguard.com. I guess an open wound where treatment with antibiotics fails and loosing your foot etc. is on the table, this might be an option of last resort.
by SirSavary | 2025-10-16 09:04:39+00:00
Not so:

> So-called source available software is a software for which its source code is made publicly available for access. It might or might not be legal to share or modify the software or its source code.

(from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Source-available)

See https://github.com/FakeFishGames/Barotrauma for an example of such a project
by hamburgererror | 2025-10-16 09:05:30+00:00
I didn't know about the size of their budget...

But even for a phone from 2015 there were many models on the market, I don't expect every brands poured that much money in developing a phone. What justifies such a big budget? And what could be a minimal budget for a decent phone?

By decent I mean an average phone: can run most of basic apps, average battery life and pictures quality.
by internet_points | 2025-10-16 09:05:36+00:00
Agree about the list monad. I have never used it in actual code. I always felt it was so arbitrary, and "implicit", in the sense that if you haven't learnt beforehand that it makes "joins", then it's certainly not obvious that it should work that way

λ> do { a <- [1,2]; pure a; } [1,2] -- oh so it returns the list unchanged λ> do { a <- [1,2]; b <- [3,4]; pure a; } [1,1,2,2] -- no what is this spooky action at a distance λ> do { a <- [1,2]; b <- [3,4]; pure [a]; } [[1],[1],[2],[2]] -- ... λ> do { a <- [1,2]; b <- [3,4]; c <- []; pure [a]; } [] λ> do { a <- [1,2]; b <- [3,4]; c <- [5]; pure [a,b,c]; } [[1,3,5],[1,4,5],[2,3,5],[2,4,5]]
by metalman | 2025-10-16 09:06:02+00:00
here are simple facts

humans are now, and have been for some time, the largest biological niche to exist.

biological law: all niches will be filled.

all life shares the same chemistry

humans are activly digging up and playing with every tiny little other nitche on the planet and moving stuff around, AND useing various genetic edditing technolgys to modify numerous life forms, which are "washed" down the drain after the experiment is over.

it goes on.(edit), and on

we are so fucked.
by baxtr | 2025-10-16 09:06:25+00:00
From: Steve Jobs, sjobs@apple.com

To: Steve Jobs, sjobs@apple.com

Date: Thursday, September 2, 2010 at 11:08PM

I grow little of the food I eat, and of the little I do grow I did not breed or perfect the seeds. I do not make any of my own clothing. I speak a language I did not invent or refine. I did not discover the mathematics I use. I am protected by freedoms and laws I did not conceive of or legislate, and do not enforce or adjudicate. I am moved by music I did not create myself. When I needed medical attention, I was helpless to help myself survive. I did not invent the transistor, the microprocessor, object oriented programming, or most of the technology I work with. I love and admire my species, living and dead, and am totally dependent on them for my life and well being.

Sent from my iPad
by DavidDodda | 2025-10-16 09:06:43+00:00
thanks for the feedback!

that's one of my key takeaways from all the comments here. a lot of people actually like the og - pre ai content I wrote more than the blog article it became. i just have to be confident in my own writing I guess.

btw, how do you have Arch in your name and have a Fiancee? sounds fishy :) /s
by contrarian1234 | 2025-10-16 09:07:10+00:00
While what the government is doing more widely is quite scary, this in isolation seems sensible?

I don't really get what the journalists' role is? To goad and harass employees of the Department of defense in to slipping up and saying more than they should? To encourage people to leak information?

Given the secretive nature of the whole institution, It seems sensible that there is some formal process for deciding what information should and shouldn't be shared. The previous setup seems sort of insane.

If the army is putting babies on spikes and it needs to be leaked.. it seems that that should happen outside of the Pentagon itself and shouldn't involve getting some government approved badge...
by goku12 | 2025-10-16 09:07:23+00:00
Please file bug reports or feature requests when you find them, if they haven't been filed already. Don't just leave silently. And not just for halloy, but for all FOSS projects in general. The developers/maintainers can choose what to do with them - but they'll at least be aware of the pain points. That too is a contribution to the projects that we use for free.

PS: This assumes that you haven't done so. But even if you did, please leave it as a request to everyone else.
by rob74 | 2025-10-16 09:09:00+00:00
Well, the White House press corps has already been changed to (how do I write this in a way that won't get me downvoted?) include more reporters friendly to the current administration since the White House asserted the right to determine itself who gets access (formerly it was the White House Correspondents' Association), so the chances of such a more-or-less unified boycott are slim. And I don't have any doubts that the Pentagon will also quickly find enough "warm bodies" (besides those from OANN) to prevent an embarrassing almost empty room at the next press conference...
by otabdeveloper4 | 2025-10-16 09:10:38+00:00
> Containers randomly break or bitrot?

All the fucking time. Maybe it's possible to control your supply chain properly with containers, but nobody actually does that. 99% of the time they're pulling in some random "latest image" and applying bespoke shell commands on top.

> I don't know what is meant by "system setup" here, and "arcane" is subjective.

Clearly you've never debugged container network problems before.
by breakingcups | 2025-10-16 09:12:03+00:00
From "The Psychology of Computer Programming":

After months of effort, a particular application was still not working, so a consultant was called in from another part of the company. He concluded that the existing approach could never be made to work reliably. While on his way home he realized how it could be done. After a few days work he had a demonstration program working and presented it to the original programming team. Team leader: How long does your program take when processing? Consultant: About 10 seconds per case. Team leader: But our program only takes 1 second. {Team look smug at this point} Consultant: But your program doesn't work. If the program doesn't have to work then I can make it as fast as you like.
by themafia | 2025-10-16 09:12:10+00:00
It's worth pointing out that the Treasury takes in tax revenues throughout the year. The sources of that income are:

50% Payroll Income Tax. 35% Social Security Taxes. 7% Business Taxes. 7% Excise Taxes.

70 years ago they were:

25% Payroll Income Tax. 25% Social Security Taxes. 25% Business Taxes. 25% Excise Taxes.

I think the priority is fixing this distribution to levels which were historically perceived as being more fair. The wealthy are one problem. The oversized corporations are the everlasting machine which drives them.
by wartywhoa23 | 2025-10-16 09:13:40+00:00
I switched to Ubuntu 3 years ago and never looked back for a daily driver.

The reason Windows (and Microsoft itself) is not 6' deep yet is a relatively small number of commercial creative software like DAWs, graphics suits and CAD modellers. Yes, there's a huge amount of legacy software in CAM, plant control and whatnot, but that can run alright on all those Windows XP and 7 machines like forever.

All major software vendors who think that Windows has too much inertial following and that its users will embrace whatever fascist surveillance machine their computers become under this abomination of OS, and refuse to port their products to Linux, will be in trouble soon.

Out of all DAW developers, only Bitwig got this trend right yet.
by tpoacher | 2025-10-16 09:15:16+00:00
I would disagree that the art is in the "academics and hobby space", though I suppose I may be using a different definition for 'art' here.

I read something some time a go and noted it down because I liked the concept:

> The japanese have two words for quality

> The first is "Atarimae hinshitsu", which can be roughly translated as "taken-for-granted quality." What do the Japanese take for granted when it comes to quality? They take for granted that things should work as they are supposed to, and they even see an elegance to things working properly -- whether it's cars, subway schedules, traditional flower arranging, or the famous tea ceremony.

> The second is "Miryoku teki hinshitsu", which means "bewitching" or "enchanting quality." This kind of quality appeals not to customer expectations and reliability (that things should do what they're supposed to), but rather to a person's aesthetic sense of beauty and elegance.

> Great products have both.

There's also the whole "Kaizen vs Cha bu duo" philosophy.

I think it was the above sentiments I was echoing, though I suppose more in a learning context.
by krisgenre | 2025-10-16 09:15:24+00:00
Exactly! I too bought the M1 Macbook Air in 2021 because of its great battery life. I wanted a powerful device for hacking on personal projects at home (I use a Dell running Ubuntu at work) but every time I opened it there was always something frustrating about OS X that made it unsuitable for dev stuff (at least for me)

* Finder - this is my most hated piece of software. It doesn't display the full file path and no easy way to copy it

* I still haven't figured out how to do cut/paste - CMD + X didn't work for me

* No Virtualbox support for Apple Silicon (last checked 1 year ago)

* Weird bugs when running Rancher Desktop + Docker on Apple Silicon

But still Apple hardware is unbeatable. My 2015 Macbook pro lasted 10 years and the M1 is also working well even after 4 years.
by Terr_ | 2025-10-16 09:15:42+00:00
> would probably have an easier time securing

Hold up, that's starting to conflate two very different ideas of what's going on:

1. "We cannot tolerate any outside visitors because it could possibly give them an opportunity to commit espionage and other serious federal crimes.

2. "We cannot tolerate specific vetted reporters that haven't promised us control over what they write and how they write it."

We can tell this isn't a (#1) concern over actual security. If it were, this (#2) "deal" would never be offered at all.

This is about controlling messages and opinions, rather than securing specific facts.
by DanielHB | 2025-10-16 09:16:18+00:00
If the child are registered with the tax authority and have a personnummer (ID number) then the parents get it at their tax-authority registered bank account.

About that kind of fraud I never heard anything like that in Sweden, but I would assume social services checks if children are attending school and if they are not, they investigate the parents. So this kind of fraud shouldn't be possible long-term. Social services would get called if a child doesn't show up for school or is not registered in any schools pretty quickly.

I also think that home-schooling is illegal, but not sure on the specifics.
by ForHackernews | 2025-10-16 09:17:32+00:00
I think your threat model is wildly backwards if you believe that average users are concerned about threats from bugs in old kernel versions. In all of your posts, you carelessly (or deliberately?) conflate privacy and security. This is the same shell game that Google themselves play in their marketing https://www.tomsguide.com/phones/google-pixel-phones/the-pix...

Your idea of a super-secure phone is a modern kernel with all the security patches running trusted, official signed Google Play spyware in a sandbox and all the apps collecting personal data in the same sandbox. There's an XKCD meme about this: https://xkcd.com/1200/ You are worrying about the printer drivers.
by AnthonyMouse | 2025-10-16 09:17:56+00:00
> I don't see how my TPM module will prevent me from using the machine the way I want.

I guess people don't know this particular dystopia is implemented.

First a platform gets third parties (games, banks, etc.) to impose their attestation system on customers. Congrats, you're locked in! This is the gun they point at you but the bullet comes after.

Now you can't leave the platform or you lose all your games, have to get a new bank, etc. The more stuff they can get to require that, the more stuck you are. This also prevents any new competitors from building a network effect. But competition -- the ability to switch to a competitor -- is the only thing stopping them from being the worst people in the world. Ads in the start menu. Censoring whatever they don't like. If you want to buy something -- anything -- they want a 30% cut. They'll hide it from you but take it anyway. All your local files get uploaded to their cloud and the terms let them use it for AI training, or whatever else they want. And soon you have to pay a monthly fee if you don't want them to be deleted. Why would not paying also delete them from your local machine? Because screw you, you don't have a choice anymore.
by throwaway7679 | 2025-10-16 09:18:43+00:00
The ideal is the owner being able to use TPM/SecureBoot/etc to ensure that the device is in the configuration they want. That means resisting tampering, and making any successful tampering become obvious.

The problem is third parties using TPM/SecureBoot/etc as a weapon against the owner via remote attestation, by preventing them from configuring their own device, with the threat of being cut off from critical services.

Having the upside without the downside would be nice, but how could it work? Is a technical solution feasible, or would it need a law/regulation?
by thaumasiotes | 2025-10-16 09:18:50+00:00
> Functions map members of a set A to members of a set B. These can simply be Cartesian products whose members are tuples.

Well, a function can't be a Cartesian product unless set B has cardinality 1. It's perfectly coherent to view a function as a set of tuples, but it's not legal for that set to contain two tuples (a, b) and (a, c) where b ≠ c.

> In my dream PL syntax a function call would be a function name followed by a tuple, and that tuple would be no different than the tuples you would use in any other part of the program (and so you could use all the tuple manipulation library goodies).

This already exists. For example, that's how `apply` works in Common Lisp.

https://www.lispworks.com/documentation/HyperSpec/Body/f_app...

(apply #'+ '(1 2)) => 3
by tpoacher | 2025-10-16 09:19:33+00:00
Yes, but, even then I feel the point was more "I need to pass to get a job, this currently feels beyond my skills/energy/time, and morals are secondary".

The important shift here is that there's increasingly a more "what pointless checkbox exercises these are" vibe to it, as if cognitive offloading of learning / skill acquisition is now secondary due to LLMs, or even actively a productivity-culture-driven shameful waste of time, which I think is seriously misguided.

It feels as if the morality argument has turned on its head; the students seem to almost feel expected to cheat and work around the "luddites" as the perceived moral thing to do. By the time they realise the value of the skills they should have acquired it will be too late.
by markusschlegel | 2025-10-16 09:20:17+00:00
As an argument in favor of pure functions, functional programmers often cite better testability: pure functions require no complicated test setup or mocks, are deterministic, parallelizable, etc. In tendency, this is certainly correct. Pure functions are often better suited for testing than their impure counterparts. However, this connection is not a neccessary implication in either direction: There are pure functions that are hard to test, and there are impure functions that are easy to test. Thus purity itself cannot be the substance that ensures a piece of program is properly testable. But then what is this substance?
by cdaven | 2025-10-16 09:22:09+00:00
> The battery lasts for days as well, which you can't really beat.

The Garmin Instinct 2X's (and 3) battery lasts for 40 days in smartwatch mode, not counting the solar charging.

The Instinct is an "outdoor watch" with a monochrome display, but it has most features the Forerunners have.
by artk42 | 2025-10-16 09:22:28+00:00
> I really hope this is not intentional from Apple to make me upgrade. That would be a big let down.

I've got a reference macbook air from 2015, which is almost clean, only zoom, teams and chrome for meets are installed and used for calls. And boy, how do I regret making macOS updates.. I can believe teams and zoom are shitbags of modern software slop, and thus started to fail running simple video calls. But even native macOS apps that are barely updated for years like notes and calendar are freezing now. So I can conclude that these anti-backward compatibility updates are highly intentional, because hardware is absolutely fine for decade, i even used this ultra-tiny air for travel work once back in 2022, it was still capable to do all office things and thin client. But last year it just turned into pumpkin.

My question is - maybe installing linux can help bring it back to life.
by 2d8a875f-39a2-4 | 2025-10-16 09:22:51+00:00
Echoing a lot of users ITT, Windows has been good to me but the enshittification has reached what feels like the end point.

Windows value to me was "everything just worked". But that's no longer the case now, unless you are willing to walk down Microsoft's centralized rails. Need an MS Account and OneDrive... need expensive modern hardware... get ads and crapware... get telemetry and data exfiltration. The effort of working around all that is non trivial. EDIT: and if I was ok with all that stuff I'd already by captured by Apple.

If I have to fuck around with something in my home OS, that OS might as well be Linux. So now I am compiling wifi and printer drivers from github (FFS Linux!) instead of disabling telemetry and hacking an install with local accounts only.

The challenge, as always, is going to be taking the family with me.
by StrangeWill | 2025-10-16 09:23:13+00:00
I've literally programmed with VSCode for basically a decade this way without issues. Zed lags, it's disappointing and if I really like Zed I'll have to sort out another setup.

MSTSC is one of the rock-solid tools from Microsoft, and does better than almost everything else available on the market other than some PC over IP technologies specifically highly optimized for this use case. I've been programming with an ancient ThinkPad forever because I'm just remoting into a much more powerful machine.
by Tuna-Fish | 2025-10-16 09:24:04+00:00
I'm probably misunderstanding the complexity of the problem, but wouldn't this be solvable by just defining the right calling convention?

"Any structures larger than x, or any structures marked with a marker type, are returned by the caller providing an outref to a buffer with correct size, and the callee directly writes the structure into that buffer."

Then you could just write normal code like

fn initialize() -> A { // the initialization code }

and it would just work? And it would reduce unnecessary copies in a lot of other situations too? Given how much work has been put into this issue, and how much less convenient the proposed solutions are, I feel like I must be missing something.
by thaumasiotes | 2025-10-16 09:24:17+00:00
I'm pretty sure OCaml functions are monadic. They don't really accept tuples (unless you intentionally do something weird).

Rather, if you define (in your mind) a function of three variables, the compiler makes that a function of one variable that returns another function. And that return-value function takes one variable and returns a third function. And that third function takes one variable and returns the result of the triadic function you intended to write.

That's why the type of a notionally-but-not-really triadic function is a -> b -> c -> d and not (a, b, c) -> d. It's a function of one variable (of type a) whose return value is of type b -> c -> d.
by contrarian1234 | 2025-10-16 09:24:47+00:00
yeah, i don't wanna shit of steve jobs. I'm sure he reflects on stuff. (though this thing seems to suggest.. he needs to reflect on some real basic human stuff..) I'm sure you can find some cute quotes from Bill Gates too. It's just not really what he's known for

just out of pure curiosity.. what's the context of this? He wrote a poem.. to email to himself? and.. how did he get access to his private emails?

I can't think of any other example of people writing and mailing poems to themselves
by allthebestforus | 2025-10-16 09:25:01+00:00
Is this the first time Apple released just the base chip and not the Pro nor the Max version at the same time?

Are they trying to milk the market in small increments? Especially before Christmas.

The MBP 14 M5 release came a bit unexpected. Many analysts mentioned beginning of 2026.

When will M5 Pro and Max be released?

What are your thoughts on comparing M4 Pro against the base version of M5?
by squidbeak | 2025-10-16 09:25:02+00:00
> What made this prediction so exciting was that it was a novel idea. Although CK2 has been implicated in many cellular functions, including as a modulator of the immune system, inhibiting CK2 via silmitasertib has not been reported in the literature to explicitly enhance MHC-I expression or antigen presentation. This highlights that the model was generating a new, testable hypothesis, and not just repeating known facts.
by strogonoff | 2025-10-16 09:25:17+00:00
> The whole point is that outside observers can’t tell.

I tried to explain that outside observers may not observe the entirety of what matters, whether due to current technical limitations or fundamental impossibility. In fact, to assume externally observed behaviour (e.g., of a human) is all that matters strikes me as a pretty fringe view.

> Are you suggesting that Searle was saying that there was a difference between the rooms and that we just needed more advanced technology to see inside them

Perhaps you are trying to read too much into what the experiment itself is. I do not treat it as “Searle tried to tell us something this way”. If he wanted to say something more specific he probably had done it in relevant works. The thought experiment however is very clear and describable in a paragraph and is open to possible interpretations, which is what we are doing now. That is the beauty of thought experiments like this.
by eimrine | 2025-10-16 09:25:22+00:00
I have never used anything except Spot trading, and it is just the regular way to buy some crypto, I have no ideas how else are you going to buy it. The third screenshot is very familiar to my experience with different Currency Exchanges. You need to input some funds to the CX, then you are choosing how do you want to exchange it, then if the market is ready for your deal you get what you have requested.

I do not see any gambling if you are going to post for example your desire to buy 1 bitcoin for your 1 dollar. As they say, "There are two fools at the market: one sells, the other buys" so you are free to sell your 1 dollar for any insane price, it is way better than having it on your Balance without any moving (because there is no warranty the CX will keep existing tomorrow, not your key means not your crypto).

Most CXs are proposing some complicated deals like to short some currency, or maybe some operation with leverages "that can lead to rapid and total loss of funds". Is this a problem for you to not use the instruments you aren't understand? Spot trading is enough good to have some profit with minimal knowledge and minimal risks.