MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by alphazard | 2025-10-13 17:24:49+00:00
What do they seek to accomplish here? There is strong precedent for the US defending the 1st amendment against foreign interests. No UK bureaucrats are going to make a career out of this. Going after a company that can defend itself and can't be intimidated, will prevent them from bluffing successfully against smaller companies, who could realistically be intimidated. If I were working at Ofcom, I would stay away from the large US sites with access to good legal counsel, and instead try to intimidate the long tail that don't.

Totally separate from the issue of whether this is good or bad: it doesn't look like these Ofcom guys are playing with a full deck.
by palmotea | 2025-10-13 17:25:29+00:00
> Sounds highly illegal.

As opposed to literal hostage taking?

> rules do not apply to war, Geneva Convention notwithstanding.

I don't know what so-called international law says, but if you're going to try to apply rules to war, it seems pretty essential that they apply to all sides or no sides, otherwise you create an exploitable situation that's ripe for abuse. The reward for following the rules should be that the other parties in the conflict follow them, too. The punishment for breaking them should be that the other parties no longer follow them.
by carabiner | 2025-10-13 17:25:33+00:00
Yeah that sounds very westernized. This is what you'd see for one person at an average, traditional Korean restaurant in the US: https://s3-media0.fl.yelpcdn.com/bphoto/GZx0kD7qjv5983YOuGd_.... Depending on the place you might see a few more/less sides.

There are also places like what you describe that don't give you all the sides, where it's just focused on having an entree, so more like this: https://www.yelp.com/biz_photos/mamas-kitchen-bellevue-2?sel.... I can understand this because I've seen groups of non-Koreans at the traditional places leaving all the banchan untouched.
by senshan | 2025-10-13 17:25:34+00:00
Seems like a fool's errand. The cited RFC8684 starts from the wrong premise:

> TCP/IP communication is currently restricted to a single path per connection, yet multiple paths often exist between peers.

In reality, IP modules of all the hosts and routers can load-balance over a set of all available interfaces, as long as global routing information is available.
by scotty79 | 2025-10-13 17:25:39+00:00
Yeah, the commotion is a bit silly. "The crash" basically brought the price of BTC to the level it was comfortably at two weeks ago.

I think disproportional media interest in last two weeks of appreciation and "the crash" is a failed attempt to finally kickstart this BTC bull or bear market. Somebody is getting impatient with last two years of steady growth.
by hinkley | 2025-10-13 17:25:57+00:00
I understand that patterns and confirmations often come from data captured years ago and reanalyzed. That’s how some comets are discovered.

What I don’t get is how you can say we are publishing the first picture and then post a picture that was published three years ago.

It looks like HN has now changed the title from the “all editors should be fired” exhibit list to something more reasonable, but the linked article is still titled, “Scientists capture first image of two black holes in orbit.”
by shadowgovt | 2025-10-13 17:25:59+00:00
The problem is that the philosophy doesn't extend to networking.

You are free to do whatever you want with your hardware. Rip the chip out and install firmware that will boot anyway when the missing chip doesn't POST.

... and when you try to connect to my server, I will send a challenge-response that you needed that chip to answer. When that fails, I'm free to do what I want with my hardware. Which is drop or reject your incoming request because I don't trust you.

So far, this situation has been stable because it's a lot more valuable to me to trust you than not; the benefit I get from having you as a user outweighs the harm that can happen if your machine has been modified and does something that breaks my protocols. In fact, the rule on the Internet has basically been "What happens in your house you have control over; what comes in from the outside is assumed to be pure screaming madness until it's validated" for that reason (among others).

... but validation is expensive and I can see why some companies would want to push the whole validation story onto "We use attestation to confirm that we can trust the software works the way we expect it to on the other side of the machine." I personally think it's a bit of a dumb experiment (I don't trust attestation itself to succeed, not when the end-user fundamentally still owns the device and every hacker on the planet can attack the attestation protocol all day if they want; I haven't seen a system that pretends it controls both sides of the network ultimately succeed yet and I don't expect I will this time either). But if companies want to win stupid prizes I don't think we need to do anything more than "not work with them" to help them along.

It's hard to do otherwise without doing injury to the core concept "You own your own machine" whether 'you' is one person with a smartphone or a corporation with a datacenter.
by jononor | 2025-10-13 17:26:03+00:00
I am not sure what your specific claims are?

Personally I do not think that we have seen the full battlefield impact of the last 10-20 years developments in microcontrollers, battery, power electronics, electromotors, MEMS sensors, imaging sensors, control firmware, computer vision and object detection. Capability per dollar has increased by a few orders of magnitude in each of these domains. We are seeing some hints of the potential impact now after Russia invaded Ukraine - low-cost drones are now killing and damaging just as much or more as existing high tech weaponry. These systems are crude, with limited autonomy, but it is already enough to wreck havoc. I do not think development of these systems have stopped, unfortunately.
by Agraillo | 2025-10-13 17:26:38+00:00
When dealing with patents, public interest, and their consequences, Bell Labs should be treated separately imo. My vague recollection of the book The Idea Factory [1] and a brief search indicate that AT&T was always treated as a special case due to its status as a regulated monopoly. This status at least culminated in the 1956 Consent Decree [2], which required making all prior patents royalty-free and (as I read elsewhere) mandated that all future patents be licensed on reasonable terms. Given Bell Labs' well-known portfolio-including the transistor, laser, CCD, DSP, and fiber-optic-related patents, this shows a significant exception to how other companies might have innovated and monetized their innovations.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Idea_Factory

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_System#1956_Consent_Decre...
by jmyeet | 2025-10-13 17:27:14+00:00
While it's fascinating to watch crypto bros learn exactly why the financial system is like it is, kinda like the kid eating baking chocolate, that's boring. It happens basically every day.

What's more interesting is how massive hte insider trader problem is already and it's only going to get worse. At some point it's going to undermine the financial markets themselves because nobody is going to trust it. Libertarians might get mad but financial markets, like all markets, require strong regulation to function.

A consequence of the presidential immunity decision is that Trump and his orbiters are allowed to insider trade with absolutely no repercussions. If somebody in his orbit does get in trouble, no problem. Just sell another pardon.

The US control and influence over the global financial system is a key pillar of its global power. As much as we might hear platitudes like "America First", this administration has done more to destroy the global power and influence of the US than any in living memory and it's not even close.
by zahlman | 2025-10-13 17:27:14+00:00
I mean, yes, the standard says that parsing should be case sensitive (I also found https://stackoverflow.com/questions/7414747). But people parse it as if it were case insensitive all the time, in part thanks to tradition established by HTML. In this case, the XML looked like

<MESSAGES> <INFO path="src/main/Kotlin/Example.kt" line="1" column="1"> This is a message from the compiler about a line of code. </INFO> </MESSAGES>

and other code would try to filter the messages for presentation. And it appears that even if their spec demanded uppercase tag names, they were case-folding them for lookup purposes (to map "INFO" to some constant like CompilerMessageSeverity.INFO, or something like that).
by adabyron | 2025-10-13 17:27:19+00:00
The US has invested a lot of money, lives, political capital & environment to become a big oil & gas producer.

One of it's potential weapons against China is that China imports most of it's oil & gas. China also has a few easy geographical choke points to prevent it from importing gas. Solar & wind plus electrical vehicles destroy this advantage.

So China has many reasons to push in this direction while the US is doubling down on it's bet, even while other historical oil countries like Saudi Arabia are diversifying away from oil.

It should also be noted that many Chinese companies are selling at a loss or very low margin, especially the electric car companies. https://www.reuters.com/investigations/china-is-sending-its-...
by philipallstar | 2025-10-13 17:27:31+00:00
> Think about the components of all those innovations from the past and if they would have been possible (to scale) without violent and forcible extraction of resources from around the globe, incl forced labor.

This is just silly. Everywhere had forced labour, but didn't manage to build what the west did. The African slavers selling their fellow continent-dwellers didn't somehow manage to pick all the people who could build the most advanced things in the world at the time.

Oxford University was founded in 1096, long before what you're describing. This is very strong evidence that the UK has a thousand years of excellent investment in education, which much better explains all the advantages that built its empire, the good bits and bad. Its advances are in part due to the Roman colonisation, which allowed Britain to rediscover things that much more advanced civilisation had discovered 1000 years prior to that founding, and then push on to far greater heights.

There are entire countries that still wouldn't have universities today if left to their own devices. But they would still have slaves, because western powers wouldn't have ended this practice, either through Christianity or, if that didn't work, by force.
by mindcandy | 2025-10-13 17:27:56+00:00
At a logical level, Bitcoin should be decorrelated from stocks. The fundamentals of Bitcoin network adoption and utilization are largely separate and independent.

But, at an emotional level, Bitcoin is considered a high-risk asset. So, whenever fear gets heavy in the fear/greed equation, Bitcoin is one of the first places people pull money out of as they flee to safety. It's also the "High Risk-High Return" spot for folks to plunk their "spare change" when they are feeling safe. So, in practice short term moves in Bitcoin are highly correlated to short term moves in equities.

Meanwhile, if you actually run the numbers, Bitcoin has out performed the SP500 (or even the SP10) by a large multiple over the past decade while having a volatility usually around the median of the SP500-top-10 that everyone is currently betting heavily into. People just have a hard time getting out of linear thinking and so they look at the big dips as short-term linear disasters while on a long-term, logarithmic view they have been rather boring. https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2Fd...
by Zarathruster | 2025-10-13 17:28:00+00:00
I'd quibble with some of this, but overall I agree: the Chinese Room has a lot of features that really aren't ideal and easily lead to misinterpretation.

I also didn't love the "observer-relative" vs. "observer-independent" terminology. The concepts seem to map pretty closely to "objective" vs. "subjective" and I feel like he might've confused fewer people if he'd used them instead (unless there's some crucial distinction that I'm missing). Then again, it might've ended up confusing things even more when we get to the ontology of consciousness (which exists objectively, but is experienced subjectively), so maybe it was the right move.
by crazygringo | 2025-10-13 17:28:12+00:00
No?

I don't have the time to spend 10 minutes getting to know a product's features to try to figure out what it might be for.

Just tell me what it's for.

I mean, it's great if people can figure out other uses for it too. If they want to use it in a new way, awesome -- don't get me wrong. But products are generally built with specific purposes in mind. So don't hide those.
by chroma | 2025-10-13 17:28:15+00:00
That's one person claiming an update bricked their car, but it's unclear if that was due to a bad software update or a hardware failure that coincided with the update. Tesla usually explains what they fixed, so it's odd that the poster never replied with more details.

Even if every software update was perfect, you would see individual stories like the one you linked to. There are millions of Teslas in the world, and they all get updates frequently, so a hardware failure will sometimes coincide with a software update. If a bad update were shipped to customers, it would be a story similar to this Jeep issue: thousands of cars affected at once, lots of furious customers, and news articles about the failure.
by zdragnar | 2025-10-13 17:28:36+00:00
> but the usual procedures you find online stops working once you reboot (or close the terminal I think?)

The environment isn't persistent between sessions. That means you need to make the change in a way that runs on every new session (login or new terminal window).

Depending on how your system is configured:

.bash_profile gets run once on every login

.bashrc gets run once on every non-login new session (i.e. a new terminal window)

It's typical, if using these files, to do something like this:

if [ -f ~/.bashrc ]; then source ~/.bashrc fi

in the .bash_profile file, putting most other things in .bashrc, such that you don't have to worry about the distinction.

If you're not even using bash or bash-likes at all, but instead something like Zsh, fish, etc you'll need to set things the way they want to be set there.

> They should add a simple env var GUI like Windows has that just works, and isn't terminal-specific

This doesn't exist in linux, because there isn't "one place" that all possible terminals draw from. Conceivably, it's possible to write a GUI tool that reads your .bashrc file, looks for anything that resembles a variable, parses the bash code to look for ways it is set, and then present a GUI tool that could update it in common cases, but... it's way easier to just write the change in a text editor.
by jcelerier | 2025-10-13 17:28:43+00:00
Funny, as a primarily linux user the windows behaviour irks me to no end, it's the cause of so many recurrent problems on end-user machines with so many apps that pollute environment.. and then you wonder why something doesn't work and then it turns out that for some reason you're using $SOFTWARE from c:\Perl64\bin instead of its proper place
by seec | 2025-10-13 17:30:06+00:00
As far as I'm concerned Wifi is a "solution" for lazy or incompetent people outside of mobile devices (who do really need it to be useful). Network cable is cheap, crimper is cheap, creating a simple network in your house is mostly a trivial matter.

I have helped some people who had many troubles with wifi devices (particularly printers) and when then didn't want to run a cable to solve the problem forever I told them to fuck off. If there is one thing that is certain with wifi, it's that it will break at some point and randomly show poor performance/issues. Anything that doesn't have to be absolutely wireless has to be connected that way, problem solved, forever.
by epistasis | 2025-10-13 17:30:06+00:00
As somebody who would like to swim in the San Lorenzo River with my children, I'm not super enthusiastic about allowing them to continue to pollute the river.

It may be that the septic regulations are excessive, but oddly I've never heard anybody argue that the regulations are unnecessary, they just argue that they don't want to follow them because they didn't have to in the past. I'd be a bit more sympathetic to the mountain folks if they had an argument that the regulations were incorrect.

The real property seizure is what's happening to the public land so that people can live for cheap and not cover their own pollution. People still have the land. Though if they want to try to overturn Euclid v. Amber and make zoning illegal, I'm there to help them! Necessary environmental regulations are not something I want to overturn, however.
by LargoLasskhyfv | 2025-10-13 17:30:12+00:00
Then it's a bad CRT, or degraded.

I remember this from decades ago, there were big differences even in new ones.

Where the silent ones not necessarily were satisfactory for cats, since their hearing is more sensitive, and perceives higher frequencies.

OTOH some cats really like to sleep atop of them, maybe because of the warmth? Or what the electrostatics do to their fur?
by freefaler | 2025-10-13 17:30:15+00:00
Yes, it's a very unfriendly decision by Google.

However, I don't think they haven't measured the number of users installing apps outside of the Play store. May be they just don't care about the small % of total users who are a large % here on HN.

This is a part of a bigger trend, Cory Doctorow spoke about 13 years ago in his "The coming war on general computing": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HUEvRyemKSg

And this will creep out to the major desktop systems too, Apple is doing it with their stupid "non-verified app" and Windows looks more likely to do so with their "need Microsoft account to login" to windows.
by sixo | 2025-10-13 17:30:32+00:00
Two extra characters per rep, each involving a "shift", and it's furthermore an eyesore to read

How is it that the comments on this post seem to consist 100% of people who think JSON is the perfect language and that any deviation from it is an unnecessary complexity? Use JSON for configuration for literally 5 minutes and you will get annoyed at quoting keys, lacking comments, escaping long strings, and juggling commas. MAML is almost exactly what I'd come up with (although I wouldn't have made commas optional, that feels weird.)
by Analemma_ | 2025-10-13 17:31:01+00:00
IIRC the Solaris implementation of getenv()/setenv() leaks memory, because they want it to still be POSIX-compatible and the POSIX API has a "obey the spec, don't leak memory, be thread-safe -- pick 2" thing going on and you can't actually have a bug-free solution that keeps compatibility with decades of Unix applications.

Arguably that's less harmful than the thread-safety issues on Linux, but there's no perfect solution here as long as POSIX stays what it is.
by hinkley | 2025-10-13 17:31:24+00:00
The ability to be bid. Two d’s though in adjective form.

Some breeds always need treats in order to train, which ultimately makes them less useful. Then there are breeds that can be enticed with praise. These are easier to work with, achieve discipline with, and thus more elaborate tricks or jobs. Being able to be influenced by words and contact is called being biddable.

Some breeds are little sociopaths who will hardly do anything unless it’s transactional.
by dylan604 | 2025-10-13 17:31:47+00:00
In my personal experience with cars that had strange electrical problems, they tend to be on a bad ground somewhere in the loop. I once took a Chevy S-10 to a place my dad recommended. A guy walked out to ask what the issue was, he nodded, took a step back to look at the truck and asked the year of the truck. He then nodded and said "Yep", and then without looking reached under the dash on the driver's side and tightened a screw by hand. All electrical problems went away. He walked away after politely telling me to have a nice day. I was baffled, and he said it would cost him more in time to write the repair up than he could honestly charge me.

The point is that stable ground connections are notoriously hard on something that by design shakes, rattles, and rolls with all of the vibrating and bouncing on our "modern" streets. It's also a very easy thing to misdiagnose unless you're a mechanic that specializes in automotive electrical systems. It also takes time for new year models to display their warts enough that non-dealer mechanics gain experience repairing them.
by gaindustries | 2025-10-13 17:31:53+00:00
> The business loses employees to Walmart etc. despite the factory having higher pay and significantly better benefits.

Better pay + benefits than the most rock bottom lowest possible pay + benefits is really pathetic.

And based on the vagueness of your claims, we can assume full-time hours are also out of the picture, meaning no health insurance.

On top of that, tyranical small business owners are usually a nightmare to work for.
by tw600040 | 2025-10-13 17:32:00+00:00
//Apple TV is available on the Apple TV app

What's confusing about this?

Netflix is available on Netflix App. HBO is available on HBO app. Normal people don't care.

It's perfectly normal for Netflix the company to run Netflix the service on Netflix the app on Netflix device if they release one. It's not confusing at all. What would be confusing is if they all had different names.
by amluto | 2025-10-13 17:32:08+00:00
Since at least 2012, environment variables have been at least as secure as ordinary memory:

commit b409e578d9a4ec95913e06d8fea2a33f1754ea69 Author: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com> Date: Thu May 31 16:26:17 2012 -0700 proc: clean up /proc/<pid>/environ handling

You can't read another process's environment unless you can ptrace-read the process, and if you can ptrace-read the process you know all its secrets anyway.

cmdline is a different story.
by sidewndr46 | 2025-10-13 17:32:18+00:00
Does anyone actually believe that Tether is backed by anything? I know there are at least a few companies that have to pretend Tether is backed by something. But I can't really believe anyone saying it. It'd be sort of like if someone just declared Madoff never really ran Ponzi scheme. It was just a big misunderstanding.

Furthermore does it even really matter if Tether is backed by anything? My understanding is they've always maintained an absolute veto on any redemption. So tehter could be backed by Trillions in assets and it'd be irrelevant.
by jcalvinowens | 2025-10-13 17:32:31+00:00
> the system would automatically fallback to the previous version by just switching the bootslot used.

That's the hard part though.

It's shockingly common in my experience to have an A/B boot setup, but no actual logic in the userspace application to switch back to the other partition if something goes wrong. It's just a defense against somebody pulling the plug during the OTA, it doesn't protect against software bugs at all.
by grues-dinner | 2025-10-13 17:32:42+00:00
And it's a nice problem to solve with AI of many kinds because you can forward-solve the kinematic solution and check for "hallucinations": collisions, exceeding acceleration limits, etc. If your solution doesn't "pass", generate another one until it does. Then grade according to "efficiency" metrics and feed it back in.

As long as you do that, the penalty for a a slop-based fuckup is just a less efficient toolpath.