MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by shadowpho | 2025-10-13 16:25:42+00:00
Two points to add:

1) Total cost of the vehicle does not matter. What does matter is the operating margin. Half a percent of the total cost of the vehicle will move them from 2% margin to 1.5% margin. (Ford has operating margin of 2% as an example)

In other words an increase in 0.5% cost of total vehicle will reduce their profits by 25%.

That’s a huge number now! Note also that car manufacturers are in a bad spot because their volumes are fairly low (smartphone = 1M/yr, car = 40k/yr) and have harsher requirements for chips, driving the cost way up.

2)AB updates are great, but they can still fail or get soft locked. Especially important around code when you configure the slot to be good and when bad.
by fleebee | 2025-10-13 16:25:55+00:00
I second this. I had a tendency to get stuck watching YouTube videos before I hid all algorithmic recommendations and the Home page with Unhook. I can finally use YouTube without getting distracted, and there's no way I'm going back.

I just wish I had an addon like this for, well, everything. The browser is such a great platform because you can have this much control over your experience--no such luck with mobile apps.
by bee_rider | 2025-10-13 16:26:19+00:00
The MKL blas/lapack implementation also provides the “cblas” interface (I’m sure most blas implementations do, I’m just familiar with MKL—BLIS seems quite willing to provide additional interfaces to I bet they provide it as well) which explicitly accepts arguments for row or column ordering.

Internally the matrix is tiled out anyway (for gemm at least) so column vs row ordering is probably a little less important nowadays (which isn’t to say it never matters).
by insane_dreamer | 2025-10-13 16:26:26+00:00
> I'm not seeing how you get from share buybacks to a shift in priorities in corporate research.

pretty easily: stock buybacks allow you to directly reward executives and funnel profits back to shareholders (by increasing share prices), making the company appear more valuable (further driving investment)

research brings long-term benefits, and immediate outcomes don't show up in 10-Qs
by ilamont | 2025-10-13 16:26:37+00:00
Universities spend ~$109 billion a year on research. ~$60 billion of that $109 billion comes from the National Institutes for Health (NIH) for biomedical research, National Science Foundation (NSF) for basic science, Department of War (DoW), Department of Energy (DOE), for energy/physics/nuclear, DARPA, NASA.

Let's talk about the other $49B.

I read or heard someplace that at many universities tuition paid by students in the social sciences is effectively subsidizing the STEM fields, as the history department or psychology professors are unlikely to require huge investments in new buildings, specialized equipment, etc., yet they pay the same tuition fees as STEM majors. Families/students paying full freight at a private university are looking at undergraduate degrees that cost $250k-$400k all in.

That can't be the whole picture, as money also flows from rich donors, corporate partnerships of various types, and at some schools such as MIT licensing fees.

It doesn't seem like tuition can keep growing at the rates that it has to make up the shortfall from government research cuts, but what about the other areas?
Show HN: No-Code REST APIs (and LLM Tools/MCPs) for Postgres
by greens231 | 2025-10-13 16:26:45+00:00
I am building QueryDeck.io, a no-code way to turn your Postgres into production-ready REST APIs in minutes — and it now also auto-generates LLM tool definitions and MCP servers from your SQL. You can deploy to our cloud or export a Node.js app to run on your own infra.

Would love some feedback from the community!
by OptionOfT | 2025-10-13 16:26:46+00:00
What I really find really weird here is that when I buy stock in Apple, I do so because I think Apple will create new value.

But with AI the hope is that the value created will be proportional to wages being removed.

I.e. if AI creates more value, it means that the large majority of people will actually have less money, bar a few lucky ones. You have to remember that AI is being touted as the final solution to basically do all your administrative work for you, and all your software engineering.

So if it fails we all lose a lot of money because the stock market will drastically go down.

But I don't think humanity overall will be better off if it succeeds.
by upboundspiral | 2025-10-13 16:27:14+00:00
I for one am always grateful when things are engineered thoughtfully and with redundancy as it is symbolic of respect for the people who are your customers. Especially in something as important as a car, "can be bootstrapped from a central computer" - when? how easily? how reliably? - is not good enough because things will inevitably go wrong for some portion of the user base.
by conductr | 2025-10-13 16:27:24+00:00
I built this same thing about 15-20 years ago, there was no plaid so I just had them input their routing and account info, I could print anything I wanted on the MICR line so I don't see why you need access to a user's bank account (seems intrusive to me). Also, at that time, I had trouble getting people to pay me even enough to cover postage so bravo to you if you have people paying you $7/check.
by HiPhish | 2025-10-13 16:27:27+00:00
We need to stop calling it "sideloading", we should call it freely installing software. The term "sideloading" makes it sound shady and hacky when in reality it is what we have been able to do on our computers since forever. These are not phones, they are computers shaped like phones, computer which we fully bought with our money, and I we shall install what we want on our own computers.
by unix_fan | 2025-10-13 16:27:34+00:00
I’m blind, and participate in a lot of research projects to create accessible technology, which are mostly done by universities. What I have noticed as a foreigner participating with US based universities is that, a lot of this research while very high-quality and very well done does not actually result in anything that the intended audience gets to use or experience. And a lot of this is due to the amount of red tape, as well as a lack of risk taking. This means that without trying to go commercial a lot of these projects end up shelved and many potential users simply never see the benefits.
by crazygringo | 2025-10-13 16:27:42+00:00
Yup, I think it would be a big help if the home page ('/') was a landing page explaining who it's for and why, and why. Is this for students? For prototyping? For quick analysis? Sample data? Importing real data? Use cases are key.

And then have a big hero button leading to the the actual tool ('/app' or '/playground' or whatever). Maybe preloaded with different sample data depending on the use case.

Right now, being dumped into a complicated interface with zero explanation is very confusing. (None of this is to criticize the project itself, just to help identify it to the people who might find the most value in it!)
by WesleyJohnson | 2025-10-13 16:27:44+00:00
I don't have links to share, because things aren't ready for primetime.

- A SAAS to help HomeSchool Coop and Collectives build an online presence where they set up member registration, show course offerings, and let parents enroll their students. Main competitor is HomeSchoolLife and this started because our own HS Collective used HSL and hated it; so I thought I'd try. The complexity has grown rapidly, trying to custom roll a CMS because I couldn't get Wagtail to integrate nicely with my site, and Django CMS leverages the Django Admin but I don't want my users to have to deal with that.

- Also playing around with a SAAS targeted at YouTube Car Flippers to be able keep tracking of their current flips and, eventually, research new potential flips.

- I've got plenty of other unfinished projects that I still tinker with; a real-time version of Words with Friends, because I hated the slow asynchronous gameplay. I started it 12 years ago and then life got in the way. I'm guessing WWF probably has this mechanic now; I don't play anymore.
by epistasis | 2025-10-13 16:27:45+00:00
> This is moving the goalpost. Now it's distance plus traffic to reach for a pre-decided conclusion.

What goalpost was moved? The freeway is the major producer of pollution, the major concentration of it. This is well documented in the literature on PM2.5: being close to a freeway is a major risk factor but urban areas are not a major risk factor.

If there's a freeway, it's not an urban area, it's a suburban area.

> I hope this helps you make stronger arguments in your next exchange,

I have no idea how you think you poked any holes at all in my argument, but this statement clearly thinks you have! Could you clarify what you think I said was wrong and how?

Living next to a major interchange is definitely living a huuuuge health risk, but again it's mostly a suburban risk.

> There's an argument to be made that cars provide economic and financial mobility, leveraged by the upper classes, which is why cars are not properly demonized. That's a separate topic from health.

If there's an argument, it's very weak. Cars are very expensive, draining the bank accounts of those on the lower end of the economic scale. Yet because we have capped density, those same people on the lower end of the economic scale must travel long distances from farther away, instead of being allowed a place in a city. Density plus transit offer a cheaper alternative without the burden of large car payments, the huge repair bills of cheap used cars, the monthly car insurance payments, and the debt trap of having to buy a car to even get a job.
Show HN: I made trythemon.me, a simple virtual fitting room
by killersheep | 2025-10-13 16:28:05+00:00
Take or upload a photo of yourself, then a photo of the outfit, start try-on => watch and share the result, no account required.runs entirely in the browser. Made for thrifters, second-hand lovers, and online shoppers who want to see if something fits before they click. Easy.
by Uehreka | 2025-10-13 16:28:19+00:00
Unfortunately CEOs have to do buybacks at every opportunity, because otherwise shareholders will sue them for failing to maximize shareholder value.

> Jobs was always thinking Apple could do better with the money in R&D than paying off shareholders. Wall Street did not approve of this position, but Jobs wasn’t one to listen to anybody, so it did not matter.

(Head spins) wait what?! No! You’re not supposed to do that! If you fail to always maximize short term profits, people might start thinking CEOs actually have agency, and they won’t be able to hide behind the “maximizing shareholder value” excuse!
by ModernMech | 2025-10-13 16:28:30+00:00
> it was such a a huge loss seeing those corporate labs disappear.

A loss for whom? Society? Of course, and that's exactly why they don't happen anymore -- because while they were a boon for society they were a terrible bet for the company. And when a company has a choice between doing good for their bottom line or doing good for society, 100% of the time they choose their bottom line.

I mean, look at the legacy of Xerox Parc from Xerox's perspective. They invited this guy in, Steve Jobs, and he commercialized their ideas. Today Xerox is worth pennies on the dollar compared to their height, doing none of what Xerox Parc researched. Apple ate their lunch. The ROI for Xerox Parc was terrible for Xerox.

For all the amazing stuff they did, they were not rewarded by the marketplace for it, they didn't produce better products for themselves, they just did other companies' R&D.

That's where universities come in, and where they are vital. If you take them out, their role will not be filled by corporations, because corpos can't stomach the kind of dollars needed to do fundamental research. Only the government can stomach that, and if somehow the voters are convinced all this isn't worth funding, it just won't happen at any level.
by cyberax | 2025-10-13 16:28:44+00:00
> Can you list some examples where a city has tried this and it failed?

Moscow, Tokyo, Minneapolis, Seattle.

Moscow is the one most familiar to me personally. They went full-in on density, demolishing 5-story buildings and putting in 20-story towers instead with the speed only possible in a corruption-filled society. You can guess what happened with housing costs.

> The only example I can think of is Minneapolis, and they have seen lower rent increases than similar cities, so it seems successful.

If I remove the labels from these graphs, would you be able to tell which one of them is MN and which one is WI: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=1N1sc ?

Rents are not a useful indicator short-term, they can be strongly affected by various transitionary events and the rent datasets are notoriously unreliable. But even then, the rent in MN is not affected that much: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/fredgraph.png?g=1N1sB&heig...

> But outside of that, I just don’t think it’s been tried enough to really make any conclusions right now.

It's been tried. With the expected results: more misery and higher housing costs. There are all these hilarious articles as a result: https://archive.strongtowns.org/journal/2023/4/26/upzoning-m...

Or Tokyo, it always cracks me up.

2016 - "Tokyo may have found the solution to soaring housing costs": https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/fredgraph.png?g=1N1sB&heig...

2024 - "Whoops, nope. It's in an even worse bubble": https://www.ft.com/content/40ce3cdc-5bc3-486f-b9e9-700af1087...
by constantcrying | 2025-10-13 16:29:01+00:00
It is a totally delusional argument. Companies always could reward their shareholders, stock buybacks aren't fundamentally different from paying dividends to shareholders. The idea that stock buybacks are what caused a decrease in company funded basic science is ridiculous.

Only in very rare cases is doing basic science anything but a total waste of money, viewed from a commercial perspective. Companies should seek to be commercial entities, which operate for profit. Anything else is just self destruction.

Look at Bell Labs, it could only exist because some company decided it could use a money shredder. Bell Labs could not survive the dismantling of the Bell telephone monopoly, because ending that monopoly ended the prerequisite that was needed to allow it to exist.
by Balinares | 2025-10-13 16:29:09+00:00
I don't have major pain points with git either (mainly just that rebase merge conflicts can get awful to deal with), but I just love jj and I'm not looking back.

It turns out there were a lot of things that I was not doing with git because with git it would have been painful.

Now my PRs are split into human-sized commits that each contain a set of changes that make sense together, and I keep moving changes around during development to keep the history tidy, until it's time to send the pull request. If a commit introduces a typo, the typo fix should go into that commit so the typo never happened in the first place and you don't get reviews like "please fix this" and then "oh wait I see you fixed it in a later commit".

And sure, with git you could checkout the faulty commit, amend it, then amend -a and hope no one was looking, and rebase your dev branch onto the amended commit and it will often even work. Or rebase -i, sure -- have fun with it if the typo was 12 commits ago.

So I just never did that because augh.

With jj it's trivial. You just switch to that commit, fix the typo, and switch back to where you were. Or fix the typo where you were and squash the fix, and only the fix, into the commit that introduced it.

No more rebase hell. No more deleting the checkout and pulling it clean because things went sideways in a way that would be hell to fix manually -- jj takes snapshots after every mutation and rolling back is easy. No more squashing on merge to sweep the messy commit history under the carpet. No more juggling index and staged files and stashed files and all that messy business. Everything is just suspiciously straightforward. To think this could have been our lives all along!

And I'm not looking back.

It's not that I dislike git. It's just that I love jj.
by jadbox | 2025-10-13 16:29:22+00:00
You can still install apps outside the play store, but the developer does need to verify their signing information. Effectively this means that any app you install must have a paper trail to the originating developer, even if its not on the app store. On one hand, I can see the need for this to track down virus creators, but on the other, it provides Google transparency and control over side loaded app. It IS a concerning move, but currently this is far from 'killing' non-appstore apps for most of the market.
by mlsu | 2025-10-13 16:29:24+00:00
> By definition, if that simulation has substantial properties, it isn't a simulation.

This is kind of a no-true-scotsman esque argument though, isn't it? "substantial properties" are... what, exactly? It's not a subjective question. One could, and many have, insist that fire that really burns is merely a simulation. It would be impossible from the inside to tell. In that case, what is fantasy, and what is reality?
by insane_dreamer | 2025-10-13 16:29:45+00:00
they don't want to

the purpose of a company is to deliver maximum return to shareholders; if they're not doing that, then they're failing their fiduciary duty and the shareholders might try to force the company to change its ways

the shareholders want the money coming to them, not to the employees

(this is why the Public Benefit Corporation, "B-Corp" structure was invented, so that the company's stated purpose can be something other than simply generating value for its shareholders)
by tantalor | 2025-10-13 16:30:11+00:00
That's an absurd comparison.

At the time there were dozens of search engines and new ones every day. Everybody knew what search engines were, and what they offered. Google did not invent the form field -> SRP pattern; people were already used to that. Google was able to rise above the field because 1. yes the homepage was nice, but more importantly 2. the results were so much better than competitors.

I don't understand the comparison to SQLite online because what are the well-known competitors, and what is it even trying to do?

Not even going to touch the ChatGPT comparison.
by mike_hearn | 2025-10-13 16:30:37+00:00
I've never heard of anyone being required to take a philosophy course but some universities surely do it. I was curious about the Stanford claim. This is the Ways system, right? Their website says you need to take at least one course in formal reasoning:

https://ways.stanford.edu/about/ways-categories/formal-reaso...

They list a few examples like market design or programming. I thought, OK, formal reasoning maybe, but is that really the same as critical thinking? Then I clicked the "See Formal Reasoning Courses in Explore Courses" link:

https://explorecourses.stanford.edu/search?q=all%20courses&v...

143 courses are considered to teach formal reasoning. First on the list is "The Questions of Cloth: Weaving, Pattern Complexity and Structures of Fabric (ARTSINST 100B)" which teaches hand weaving on a loom. A bit further down there is "Introduction to Bioengineering" which teaches "capacities of natural life on Earth" and "how atoms can be organized to make molecules". It goes on like that.

I dunno, this doesn't sound like anyone has to study critical thinking specifically to pass the formal reasoning requirements. It sounds like almost anything connected to science or engineering in any way counts. And that's Stanford!
by cryzinger | 2025-10-13 16:30:43+00:00
+1 to focus mode; at least on Samsung-flavored Android, you can set a recurring schedule so that focus mode (or any mode) automatically kicks in on certain days/times, which I use to block notifications from and access to certain apps during peak working hours.

Another feature I really like that also might be unique to Samsung-flavored Android--it's been a decade since I've had a device running Vanilla android, lol--is the overall daily screentime tracker. It's purely observational, so there's no penalty for going over, but unlike the app time limits that you can snooze there isn't a way to subtract time that you actually spent, which helps keep me accountable. Mainly I like having a widget that tracks the day's stats on my home screen, because being able to go "oof, did I really spend 45 minutes on <app> today already?" is a strong motivator for me to shape up.

As a bonus, you can also _exclude_ certain apps from the time limit tracker, which I like because it nudges me towards more constructive habits. Stuff like my notes app and Waze don't count towards the timer, nor does my e-reader of choice, which means I'm more likely to read a few pages of a book if I have time to kill since it's "free" against my daily screen goal.
by whizzter | 2025-10-13 16:30:46+00:00
As an educator I would've loved to have this last time I was teaching SQL.

1: No install

2: Ephermal (just reload if you've messed up?)

3: Good syntax highlighting

4: Visual UI to navigate the model

Why to pay for it though? That's a harder nut to crack, the UI is quite nice compared to many I've seen so maybe sell as an addon for those that provider hosted databases, collaborative spaces or as a desktop app. No obvious slam dunks though.
by teovall | 2025-10-13 16:30:50+00:00
Apple TV+ needed to be renamed but they went with the absolute worst option.

There's already an Apple TV device and an Apple TV app. Neither of which are required for using Apple TV+ and both of which have functionality other than using Apple TV+.

Some people think that Apple TV+ requires an Apple device to use it and just dismiss it as an option. Apple should have come up with a new brand without Apple in the name. That would broaden their potential market and get their foot in the door with people who don't own any Apple products.
by Leftium | 2025-10-13 16:31:15+00:00
I'm curious why you need navigation like this. Is it like selecting text while you read? (I didn't know that was a thing until I read comments about that.)

I find it easier to just read the comments.

I doubt the official HN will ever add this feature, but it seems feasible as a TamperMonkey script or even browser extension.

I will consider including a feature like this when I rewrite https://hw.leftium.com
by Sohcahtoa82 | 2025-10-13 16:31:19+00:00
This reminds me...

My parents gave me a smart weather station for Christmas a few years ago. I never even took it out of the box. I know it exposes a web server so I can view a fancy UI in my browser...

I should take it out of the box and run a pentest on it. I imagine it's pretty insecure. The developers of these types of things often don't consider security.
by DamnInteresting | 2025-10-13 16:31:43+00:00
> Right now, AI has the potential to increase productivity.

The detail many seem to forget is that "AI" is Artificially Inexpensive. It must eventually turn a profit, or collapse. Once providers start charging what they must to remain solvent, and/or the output is burdened with advertising, the gains, real or perceived, will likely evaporate.