MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by ffsm8 | 2025-10-15 06:04:30+00:00
Isn't a devaluation the same as inflation, just measured against other currencies?

Basically inflation measures against itself at an earlier time, devaluation measures against other currencies at the same moment. So it both describes the fact that the currency in question is using purchasing power, measured from different points of view.

But I'm not knowledgeable on the topic, I just mentally stumbled a little when reading this thread which seemingly (to my interpretation of what was written) made them sound like different concepts entirely.
by rixed | 2025-10-15 06:04:40+00:00
Match my experience as well. For every event I've been part of that's also been reported in the news, I've found the news wildly wrong. Not innacurate, wrong. And lately, on top of that I've also had the terrifying experience of wikipedia opting for the wrong reported news and dismissing several objections from people actually involved in the actual events.

The worse is that it's oftentime not even attributable to some malicious agenda, or gross incompetence of someone in particular. It's just how this industry functions.

Someone down the thread is asking "what's the alternative". The alternative is to admit that you are not informed beyond your immediate horrizon.
by mzl | 2025-10-15 06:05:33+00:00
Chuffed has very low overhead while still being a very fast LCG solver, so it is not surprising that it works best for small problems.

You might find it interesting to install and try both Huub (https://github.com/huub-solver/huub) and Pumpkin (https://github.com/consol-lab/pumpkin) as well. I have both in https://zayenz.se/blog/post/benchmarking-linkedin-queens/ with good results for the small problems I tested there. Both also did very well in the MiniZinc Challenge this year.

One thing that might be interesting (and might be useful for some solvers) is to change from checking if there is a solution and requiring each part to be used in the solution, to find solutions and minimize the number of unused parts.

One additional constraint that you could add that I don't think I've seen is distance to goal. In essence, for each grid position (without considering any tracks) there is a shortest time it would take from that position to get to the final position. If a train is in (a, b) and would take at least time t to get to the exit, there is no way to solve the problem if it is in (a, b) at time MAX_TIME-t. Might be useful for some solvers, worth testing.

Finally, adding some simple heuristic might help some solvers (I'm thinking of Gecode in particular here). My initial guess would be to add an interleaving over time steps of the train_row, train_col, and train dir for each train and search in order. That would as a basic heuristic represent a search from the start snaking out. Value choice is trickier to specify in MiniZinc of course.
by jacquesm | 2025-10-15 06:06:26+00:00
> But why would we want to throw away the perfectly good C implementation, and why would we expect the C experts who have been carefully maintaining SQLite for a quarter century to be the ones to learn a new language and start over?

Because a lot of language advocacy has degraded to telling others what you want them to do instead of showing by example what to do. The idea behind this is that language adoption is some kind of zero sum game. If you're developing project 'x' in language 'y' then you are by definition not developing it in language 'z'. This reduces the stature of language 'z' and the continued existence of project 'x' in spite of not being written in language 'z' makes people wonder if language 'z' is actually as much of a necessity as its proponents claim. And never mind the fact that if the decision in what language 'x' would be written were to be revisited by the authors of 'x' that not only language 'z' would be on the menu, but also languages 'd', 'l', 'j' and 'g'.
by toredash | 2025-10-15 06:07:09+00:00
AWS publish their own metrics for cross-AZ and internal-AZ latency: https://eu-central-1.console.aws.amazon.com/nip/ (Network Manager > Infrastructure Performance)

> In general the goal should be to deploy as much of the stack in one zone as possible

Agree. The can be a few downsides one has to consider if you have to fail over to another zone. Worst case, there isn't sufficient capacity available when you fail over if everyone else is asking for capacity at the same time. If one uses e.g. karpenter, you should be able to be very diverse in the instance selection process, so that you get at least some capacity, but maybe not the preferred.
by fsto | 2025-10-15 06:07:26+00:00
Wow, thanks a LOT for that comprehensive answer! Very helpful!

Two questions I didn’t manage to find answers to: * Do you have or plan support for webhooks? The scenario for us is that we’d ideally have one platform for setting up customer integrations for which we will make requests to and await request from * When you host, do you expose the access and refresh tokens for the connected integrations? The use cases for us are: * If we wanna make a feature / request that seems out of scope for Metorial * If we wanna migrate from Metorial, we don’t want to force our customers to have to reconnect * I love that we can bring our own OAuth apps which would be the default for us. But to try out an integration out or for (from our perspective) low prio integrations we’d still like to offer - do you offer your own OAuth apps that we can piggy back on. Just to save the customer from the effort of having to set up an OAuth apps foe each service. I know it comes with a lock in, but it’s worth it in some cases for us.

You’ve made me very excited to try you out, so I’ll implement support for both Composio and Metorial.

Thanks again for taking the time and efforts to answer so thoroughly!

Sent a connection request to you on LinkedIn.
by sreekanth850 | 2025-10-15 06:07:40+00:00
I see where you’re coming from, but there’s a small difference. Coding itself is mostly a routine tasks, turning ideas into working code. Humans really stand out in the important parts:creative thinking, planning and architecting the system, deciding what it should do, how it should do, finding problems, checking code quality, and making smart decisions that a tool can’t. AI can help with the routine work, but the creative and thinking parts are still human.And this is exactly where developers should focus and evolve themselves.
by anon7000 | 2025-10-15 06:08:09+00:00
So if they released a native desktop app with fewer features, do you think it’d be worth it? Or do you think they shouldn’t write any apps?

Electron is the most cost effective, least wasteful way to produce a desktop app on all 3 OSes. They’re providing a feature to people who wanted it, while wasting less money from ungrateful customers like yourself who don’t care. It’d cost much more to build & maintain a native desktop app when electron works just fine.
Tell HN: Create a NAT64 Network on macOS with a hidden menu
by keepamovin | 2025-10-15 06:09:39+00:00
So I just discovered this and couldn't find it documented anywhere exactly like this, so wanted to share for the novelty value.

I like to think I discoverd a "hidden" feature or easter egg (like when you tap some phone settings value X times and then the phone becomes "specially activated", or key in some numeric keypad mantra that unlocks a carrier settings, or what not), but maybe this NAT64 thing is somewhat widely known, haha.

So story goes, I was setting up WiFi sharing, and the menu locked up, so I went to Force Quit it (Righ click dock icon, then hold down Option key). As I did that I noticed a partially occluded new option appear beneath the normal "Share to" options panel, that seemed like you could scroll down to it. Then it force quit and disappeared.

From the quick glance, I thought it said "Create NAT4 network" and this got me excited because it sounded powerful and new. I knew of NAT, but not much about it, other than: "Maybe I can create a LAN where devices on this wifi have their own IP but we all share the public facing one?" Or some approximate impression like that.

Now I wanted it back, but I didn't know how to get it back, because I wasn't exactly sure how I had triggered it, or it it were "special state" that had surfaced only in the context of the lock up error of the settings page.

I tried holding Option while on the sharing page. No. Tried it while right click the information circle next to WiFi. Again nothing.

I searched AI but the ways it found to activate this didn't work. There was some talk of CLI but I wanted this GUI thing. Apple had clearly intended there to be an menu option, and I wanted it.

Finally, I tried to Force Quit again, to see if that did anything. But before I clicked Force Quit, something had happened when I hit Option: then menu had returned. I cautiously released the Option key and the menu persisted. Yay! I could now toggle it on. Which I immediately did. I have no idea what it does, really, but it's cool. A hidden option on Internet Sharing is now enabled. Excellent.

So hopefully you had some fun reading this or trying it for yourself. And maybe you can tell me what exactly this does. Finally, I wasn't aware that "Option when Right-clicked Dock Icon" as a "UI idiom" on macOS for exposing new behavior in the apps themselves, I thought it only worked to bring up new items in the Right click menu. So that's interesting. And why I think maybe I discovered something new or undocumented. So hopefully I did and you have some fun with it. This was all on the latest version of macOS 26.

[0]: https://support.apple.com/en-mn/guide/mac-help/mchlp1540/mac (there's this guide, to be sure, but the suggested method to enable to hidden menu does not work)
by toredash | 2025-10-15 06:10:42+00:00
Are you thinking about already-cached container images on the host level ? Not sure how AZP fits in here?

Since you mentioned it, what I've done before when it comes to improving CI builds, is to use karpenter + local SSD mounts with very large instance types in an idle timeout of ~1h. This allowed us to have very performant build machines at a low cost. The first build of the day took a while to get going, but for the price-benefit perspective it was great.
by danpalmer | 2025-10-15 06:10:43+00:00
If there are problems that are specific to AI then sure we should legislate about it. For example defining what "fair use" is for AI training, that's a clearly new area.

But most of the pushback I've seen to AI in policy is so over-fit to current AI that it would be trivial to work around it. You can argue that we'd be letting perfect be the enemy of good, but I think we'd be making policies that will be out of date by the time they even make it into law, and that we'll never make any progress at all.

That said, I'm all for being proven wrong. The US tends to write highly specific legislation so I'm sure it'll try a few of these. The EU tends to write much more vague legislation specifically for this reason. We'll see how they end up working.
by ralfcheung | 2025-10-15 06:11:17+00:00
As Sam Altman just announced ChatGPT can now write erotica, we are ready to announce our AI-powered erotica platform.

Most of us here use tools like ChatGPT for everything from coding to drafting emails. But this creates a problem of "context collapse." Your work queries, personal questions, and more sensitive creative explorations all end up in the same, permanent history. OpenAI (and Grok!) are able to learn about your work and your sexual desires based on your usage on their platforms.

We believe you need a separate, dedicated space for this kind of creativity—a private journal, not a public square.

That’s why we built Sylvaine AI.

Sylvaine is an AI-powered platform designed for writing fiction, with privacy as its foundation, not an afterthought.

The goal is to give creators a sanctuary where they can explore their imagination without looking over their shoulder.

I’m here all day to answer any questions you have about our tech stack, our privacy policy, or the challenges of building a privacy-first AI product.
by rdtsc | 2025-10-15 06:11:57+00:00
> If they’re really so confident on the LLM’s effectiveness, why not just keep it voluntary, why force it on people? The results will be there in the outcome of the shipped product for all to see.

It’s a bit like returning to the office. If it’s such an obvious no-brainer performance booster with improved communication and collaboration, they wouldn’t have to force people to do it. Teams would chomp at the bit to do it to boost their own performance.
by nginity | 2025-10-15 06:13:04+00:00
The message arrived during those quiet hours when introspection tends to surface most honestly: “Can we talk tomorrow? I need advice.”

It came from one of my senior engineers — someone I deeply respect, someone whose technical judgment has shaped our architecture in profound ways. The next morning, over coffee, they shared something I wasn’t expecting:

“I watched our new hire solve in hours what would have taken me weeks, using tools I don’t even understand yet. And I felt… scared.”
by strogonoff | 2025-10-15 06:13:05+00:00
You’re talking about Cartesian mind-body dualism. It’s absolutely fine to not sneak in that view into an otherwise sound thought experiment, as it’s quite irrelevant—the concept of p-zombie from Chinese room experiment holds regardless.

> The argument is not "mostly successfully", it's identically responding.

This is a thought experiment. Thought experiments can involve things that may be impossible. For example, the Star Trek Transporter thought experiment involves an existence of a thing that instantly moves a living being: the point of the experiment is to give rise to a discussion about the nature of consciousness and identity.

Thing not possibly existing is one possible resolution of the paradox. There may be a limitation we are not aware of.

Similarly, in Searle’s experiment, the system that identically responds might never exist, just like the transporter in all likelihood cannot exist.

> The entire point of the chinese room is that from the outside the two things are impossible to distinguish between.

To a blind person, an orange and a dead mouse are impossible to distinguish between from 10 meters away. If you can’t distinguish between two things, it doesn’t mean the things are the same. Ability to understand, self-awareness and consciousness are things we currently cannot measure. You can either say “these things don’t exist” (we will disagree) or you have to say “the systems can be different”.
by stephen_g | 2025-10-15 06:13:15+00:00
True, and it's the same with any big redesign that it should tend to be the worst it will ever be at the start and then be gradually refined. I expect it will end up quite good by the time they want to start over again in 10 or so years, and people will complain about losing it and how bad the new interface is! At least there are a few good years in the middle to end of each cycle!
by BiteCode_dev | 2025-10-15 06:13:32+00:00
Yes, but flexibility that happens in those conditions is at the cost of tremendous effort and risk from the population, usually under the tutelage of bigger power structures. EG: scammers are usually part of some organisation that has the power to do that, and the guy giving his name on the bank account is basically disposable.

Also the fact the population is so huge make it hard even for such a powerful state to grasp it all.

But regular citizen flexibility when something is not state-approved in advance is very limited compared to ours. The state can limit where they can move because of the citizen passport, limit what they can buy (and say) because of wechat, limit what they can see and know because of the GFW, limit how much you can be anonymous because big cities have cameras everywhere, coupled with AI tracking.

In Europe, if my government does something I don't like, I can pay in cash, or cross a border and do it in a different country. I can complain on the internet and find like-minded people to organize, advice, help...

I want to go to a gay bar and pay without having a record of it? I can. I want to finance an art or political project that the government would not like? I can.

In fact, anywhere in the world there is cash, and I have some secure cash stash, I can pay if I lost my phone, or with no battery. I can pay if my bank account is blocked by the bank. If it's in the red. If there is an outage on their app. I can pay if I've been robbed of my wallet and phone. I can pay if there is no electricity or no internet. I can even pay if war is declared, if I'm under bombs. I can buy illegal drugs, illegal plant seeds, illegal literature, and illegal human services.

Remember when visa prevented us to send money to wikileak? It was not illegal to do so in my country, and it was my money, but they just said no. Yet I could pay in Bitcoin, that I could buy with cash.

No-cash societies make everything easier when everything goes according to plan. When you fit in the box, and the box is not broken. It's why it feels so great, because day-to-day life is mostly this, for most people.

But the lack of alternatives will make you feel helpless the day you really need it. Cashless has never been about convenience, it's about deleting those annoying grey areas, inch by inch. It's about control.

It's not a new thing for China. The first time I went there, I was 17 years old, and there was no internet. So the state appointed us a state guide, and she was following us everywhere during the whole time, to make sure "we were safe".

Now China doesn't need to do that anymore. They know everything you do at any moment except in the remote countryside. And they can push a button if they want to stop you.
by vintermann | 2025-10-15 06:14:41+00:00
> he mentions in his book that although he wanted to reform mass surveillance, it looked a little different once he was actually responsible for people’s safety

Assuming that he was sincere about wanting reform in the first place (and that's a big if for any book like this! The best you can say for Obama vs. most other politicians, is that he at least likely wrote it himself), what it means was that he was persuaded that mass surveillance was useful. He doesn't say how, or by who, he just vaguely waves at the burden of command.
by bruce511 | 2025-10-15 06:15:03+00:00
>> I certainly hope we'll see progress on cancer in my lifetime).

Good news. You already have :).

Firstly, it's worth pointing out that "cancer" is not really 1 thing. There are lots of different conditions that are cancer, but they are different in many ways. For example lung cancer is pretty bad because your body needs lungs to function. Whereas say a melanoma on your foot is easier for your body to cope with (because your organs are all working.)

Some cancers are easily removed via surgery, some are not.

Likewise chemotherapy is a term covering a lot of different drugs and drug combinations. Advances in this space, matching doses, and drugs, to cancers have progressed enormously over the last couple decades. Some (although very much not all) cancers are now curable.

The most critical part of cancer survival is how early you catch it. But cancers are mostly asymptomatic so unless you "go looking" it's likely they'll be advanced before detection.

The biggest progress with cancer is thus regular screening. Especially for the most common ones. Prostate cancer for example is a simple blood test. How many of us are doing that every 6 months?

Cancer will always be with us. The causes are diverse, and often unexplainable. But we have made huge strides in early detection, as well as treatments. No doubt there will be more strides to come.

So let me be the first to turn your hope into reality :)
by xbaicai | 2025-10-15 06:15:31+00:00
Introducing Seedream 4.0: ByteDance's Revolutionary AI Image Generator We're witnessing a paradigm shift in creative technology. Seedream 4.0 just dropped, and the numbers are staggering: • 1.8 seconds to generate 4K images (10x faster than competitors) • 12-billion parameter architecture • 4K ultra-HD output quality • Natural language editing - just describe what you want changed Why this matters for builders: The creative bottleneck is disappearing. What used to require expensive design teams and hours of iteration now happens in seconds. We're talking about: Marketing teams generating campaign visuals instantly E-commerce brands creating product mockups at scale Content creators maintaining character consistency across stories Startups prototyping visual concepts without design budgets The technical breakthrough: Advanced multimodal capabilities with surgical precision editing. You can batch process, maintain character consistency, and even render professional text within images. Early traction signals: Already trusted by creative professionals worldwide, with testimonials showing 10x productivity gains. This isn't just another AI image tool - it's infrastructure for the next generation of creative companies. When ByteDance (TikTok's parent) puts their full weight behind creative AI, you pay attention. The future of visual content creation just accelerated. What creative workflows will you rebuild with sub-2-second image generation? #AI #CreativeTech #Startup #YCombinator #ByteDance
by nobodywillobsrv | 2025-10-15 06:15:44+00:00
What is important is crime rate given exposure. Not crime rate.

Mitigation matters.

This misreasoning or misrepresentation is at the heart of a lot of nonsense to do with interventions and effects. See COVID and what not.

It is very hard to measure crime rate given exposure.

And finally rates do not matter much. What matters is interventions and policy in reaction to each observation. People feel that each murder not resulting in back propagation through policy intervention space to update the weights to prevent it from happening. Instead only narrative space weights are being updated.

The idea that rare events below some threshold on a per capita per year basis must be ignored is pushed around too and people can see through it.

How much has spend on crime cameras gone up over the last few decades and how do you factory that into crime data? How have people moved? We don't have contact rates for people and criminals so it's all very hard to estimate.

Just because many basic people simply can not study rare events without getting upset doesn't mean we should not do so and try to drive the rate of bad things happening to zero.

It's particularly bad in the UK where rates are actually up yet the media seems to always pick some dimension where arrests or crimes are down and push that. People no longer trust the data process let alone the reasoning behind most media reports. They might not be able to describe it but they can feel it.

I get irritated about this as it's the same contact process and susceptibility problem in epidemiology and yet some how politicized the other way.
by godelski | 2025-10-15 06:17:10+00:00
That makes absolutely no sense.

We can redefine this with more statistical language. The claim would then be "When the likelihood of a sample is low, the sample is likely correct." Which is nonsense.

It is worth noting when you continuously are getting low likelihood samples, but the usual conclusion is that you have biased sampling. Maybe the model is bad, but in some sense that's not so different.

Let's go back to normal language. Anecdotally, a HN user might think a $100k/yr salary is not very much. But the data suggests that it is. Is the anecdote right?! No, we are just biased because we're comparing incomes in tech and often around the Bay area.

I think it is no surprise that one of the richest men in the world is out of touch. He is, by definition, a statistical anomaly. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯