MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by Jaauthor | 2025-10-14 01:26:07+00:00
As an author, I'm working on different stories and projects all the time. Main thing is to keep thinking of new things to do, I've already written and self-published 20+ short stories, and I've written two middle-grade scifi novels.

One thing I've come to understand about the process is that becoming a self-sufficient author is very similar to being a startup - only you're a startup of yourself. Building the product, building your market, building the infrastructure, watching what your other 'startups' are doing - it's all part of the process.

In the past days, I've released one of my stories as a 'Make Your Own Adventure' - https://inkican.com/make-your-own-scifi-adventure-now/

I've also integrated Bluesky into my blog comments: https://inkican.com/test-driving-a-new-comment-platform-blue...

And I've created some free STEM content for K-6 teachers on the future of space elevators: https://inkican.com/space-elevators-getting-to-the-next-leve...

Going to continue with my ideas and I appreciate the chance to tell you about them. Thank you. :)
by pchristensen | 2025-10-14 01:26:29+00:00
Off the top of my head, Kilmar Abrego Garcia had a judicial stay against exportation and the administration said his deportation was an error, but he spent weeks in an El Salvadoran prison. And there was the Korean battery factory workers in Georgia.

There were also more cases in the district court record that led to the Kavanaugh Stops decision: https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2025/10/scotus-analysis-...

There have been so many cases documented so thoroughly. All you have to do is believe that it's not impossible and the reporting does the rest.
by bsder | 2025-10-14 01:26:49+00:00
> If you have 10k (say) users on CGNAT that are compromised, it's likely that there's at least 1 on each CGNAT IP. This means you can't just null route compromised IPs as you are effectively null routing the entire ISP.

How about we actually finally roll out IPv6 and bury CGNAT in the graveyard where it belongs?

Suddenly, everybody (ISPs, carriers, end users) can blackhole a compromised IP and/or IP range without affecting non-compromised endpoints.

And DDoS goes poof. And, as a bonus, we get the end to end nature of the internet back again.
by faxmeyourcode | 2025-10-14 01:27:28+00:00
Absolutely, it's wildly fun to read the outputs of even a little tiny 0.8M model trained on CPU. And now I've actually got a much better understanding of the transformer architecture after playing around with it for a day. This repo is probably going to spawn some new folks to try out ideas which will turn into new researchers in the field, no doubt.
by toss1 | 2025-10-14 01:28:16+00:00
Yes, you need to break some eggs to make an omelette, but you do not need to spend more than a quarter-Billion dollars to help elect an administration working to end democracy in order to build a new spacecraft. In fact the spacecraft development would likely go better without any political intervention at all; it is widely seen as a distraction, and rightly so.
by shkkmo | 2025-10-14 01:28:40+00:00
> Would that be a good hammer?

They're called rubber mallets and they are useful in a number of situations where you want to

> I would hope a malicious app I willingly installed will be able to behave maliciously.

You should be able to install an app that has continuous access to your screen but that doesn't mean that continuous access to your screen is something you should have to grant to every piece of software that runs on your computer.
by toast0 | 2025-10-14 01:28:41+00:00
Most eyeball networks have a lot of inbound traffic and not very much outbound, but interconnections with other networks are almost always symmetric, so there's a lot of room for excess egress before it causes pain to the ISP.

When I ran a large web site that attracted lots of DDoS, it didn't really seem worthwhile to track down the source and try to contact ISPs. I had done a lot of trying to track and stop people sending phishing mail under our name, and it's simply too much work to write a reasonable abuse report that is unlikely to be followed up on. With email, mostly people seem to accept the Received headers are probably true; with DDoS, you'd be sending them pcaps, and they'd be telling you it's probably spoofed, and unless I've got lots of peering, I'm not going to be able to get captures that are convincing... so just do my best to manage the inbound and call it a day.
by NotPractical | 2025-10-14 01:29:00+00:00
A law with more teeth than the EU's Digital Markets Act (which, contrary to popular belief, does not actually require sideloading) could theoretically be passed. The current (pre-lobbying) iteration of the App Store Freedom Act looks pretty good (ctrl+f "security", "safety", "integrity" returns zero results).

https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/3209...

Realistically speaking, that probably won't happen, though. What can you, yourself do to mitigate the impact?

Install a forked version of Android without Developer Verification. LineageOS, GrapheneOS and CalxyOS are all pretty good options. Stop using any apps with remote attestation via Play Integrity, which will mean sacrificing more and more functionality as time goes on. Try to use mobile sites instead of mobile apps as much as possible. Watch the F-Droid catalog get smaller and smaller until it crumbles completely when it becomes unusable by >80% of Android users.
by gtowey | 2025-10-14 01:29:20+00:00
> He deserves at least some credit, considering that he and Bezos are the only billionaires actually willing to put their wealth into chasing a vision.

As much as I love space exploration, I think it's actually a problem that so few people get to decide where so much money goes. Imagine if instead we as a society could put it towards better education, healthcare, public transportation so that the downstream effect is a society with many more aerospace engineers and astrophysicist, who dont have to instead focus on working corporate jobs just to afford housing.

We might foster a society where space exploration is an ongoing societal goal instead of a playground for the elite.
by freditup | 2025-10-14 01:29:53+00:00
Does anyone know the best way to get a reliably working PS2 nowadays? I happen to have a bunch of old PS2 games and would love to have a reliable PS2 to be able to use them with. But buying online seems fairly fraught - how do you have any guarantee you get a reliable device? And they seem to be fairly expensive now.

(I couldn't read the article because the site was currently down for me, so apologies if this comment is off-topic, but hopefully relevant!)
by yawnxyz | 2025-10-14 01:30:26+00:00
the answer seems to be both of both worlds - if you're going to do for loops why not just use python?

the answer is both a faux programming language, and really bad ux / really hard to read / scan

maybe what they need is a program that generates better readable text; and somehow you can flip between the determinism of code and ux of readable text?!

(is that possible)
by scrubs | 2025-10-14 01:30:50+00:00
Agree. I'll add some arguments. As another recent HN post pointed out there's good politics and BS politics. For example engineering and business usually have orthogonal goals and different time frames. Working out a solution both can be happy with is good politics.

I've mentioned numerous examples on HN of BS politics so I won't waste your time there. But read Ishikawa's TQM the japanese way for the big picture.

Second a reflexive avoidance of politics is a bad sign. To deal with politics (and disagree) puts you one step closer to conflict with management. Now if management is malign or incompetent that that's a problem - but it's a problem that if not solved will sink the ship. Tech stuff is subservient to organizational maturity not the reverse.

Alternatively management may be fine but one may work from a cynical viewpoint and act like there's a problem where there is not. Don't do that. Bleeding cynicism is poison for cross functional coordination. A reflexive rejection of politics signifies fear, and absence of solutions which is not what we want to see in senior people.

And like the comment above says morals and ethics count. You can have a brain but if you don't have a backbone to push back ... you are not helping. You are part of the problem.

Good politics is people are good until proven otherwise, about pushing to organization to a higher local maximum even if its a touch uncomfortable making that jump.

The idea real valuable work can get done without politics is glib ignoring major potential problems. It rests on a nebulous definition of politics. It sounds nice in an interview (because it's a conveys a false sense of safety or risk) but it absolutely isn't help on the job. Finally, we can't know what a person really thinks ... until he/she is on the receiving end of a bad deal. Until then it's all talk without consequence.
by BeetleB | 2025-10-14 01:30:58+00:00
> An inflexible timeline is a constraint that is often valid -- e.g. if you have to launch a product meant for classrooms before the school year begins.

That's not an inflexible timeline. That's just a timeline.

> So then the real question becomes, why wasn't work scoped accordingly? Why weren't features simplified or removed once it became clear there wouldn't be time to deliver them all working correctly? There's a failure of process there that is the root cause.

Because management didn't want to drop features. Hence "inflexible".

I'm not saying this is always the reason, or even most of the times. But if we can't invoke it when it is the problem, then the exercise is pointless.

> Similarly, with "incentives are misaligned", that's fuzzy.

Any generic statement is inherently fuzzy.

> You can't usually just stop at fuzzy cultural/management things because you want to blame others.

Did you really think I was advocating responding to a whole process with one liners?

The examples you gave are often ones they will not accept as root causes.
by gjsman-1000 | 2025-10-14 01:31:05+00:00
> I think we probably need more government regulation of these IoT devices. For example, having a "hardware" limit of (say) 10mbit/sec or less for all networking unless otherwise required. 99% all of them don't need more than this.

What about DDoSs that come from sideloaded, unofficial, buggy, or poorly written apps? That's what IoT manufacturers will point to, and where most attacks historically come from. They'll point to whether your Mac really needs more than 100mbps.

The government is far more likely to figure it out along EU lines: Signed firmware, occasional reboots, no default passwords, mandatory security updates for a long-term period, all other applicable "common sense" security measures. Signed firmware and the sideloading ID requirements on Android also helps to prevent stalkerware, which is a growing threat far scarier than some occasional sideloaded virus or DDoS attack. Never assume sideloading is consensual.
by westonnealj | 2025-10-14 01:31:12+00:00
https://app.geteasydex.com

An always up-to-date contact book.

Share as many or as few of your contact details with another person via a single link.

When you update a contact detail, those you have shared it with see the update.

Did you move? Your whole family can see the new address.

I am working on the ability for you to share contact with businesses. The dream is that I can update my address in one place then my CC provider and every subscription using that credit card will have my new billing address automagically.
by BeetleB | 2025-10-14 01:32:51+00:00
> Having done quite a bit of politicing at a centuries old, med sized company, I can tell you that what management wants you is the assurance that this particular problem won’t happen again.

I'm not disagreeing. I'm saying they should phrase it this way (and some do), instead of masking it with an insincere request for root causing.

> Ideally there will be an actionable outcome, so someone can check that off a todo list at a later meeting

Occasionally this is the right thing to do. And often this results in a very long checklist that slows the whole development down because they don't want to do a cost-benefit analysis of whether not having an occasional escape is worth the decrease in productivity. And this is because the incentives for the manager is such that the occasional escape is not OK.

In reality, though, he will insist on an ever growing checklist without a compromise in velocity. And that's a great recipe for more escapes.

That's the problem with root cause analyses. Sometimes the occasional escape is totally OK if you actually analyze the costs. But they want us to "analyze" while turning a blind eye to certain things.

I've worked at places that understood this and didn't have this attitude. And places that didn't. Don't work for the latter.

BTW, I should add that I'm not trying to give a cynical take. When I first learned the five whys, I applied it to my own problems (work and otherwise). And I found it to be wholly unsatisfying. For one thing, there usually isn't a root cause. There are multiple causes at play, and you need a branching algorithm to explore the space.

More importantly, 5 (or 3) is an arbitrary number. If you keep at it, you'll almost always end up with "human nature" or "capitalism". Deciding when to stop the search is relatively arbitrary, and most people will pick a convenient endpoint.

Much simpler is:

1. What can we do to prevent this from happening again?

2. Should we solve this problem?

Expanding on the latter, I once worked at a place where my manager and his manager were militant about not polluting the codebase to solve problems caused by other tools. We'd sternly tell the customers that they need to go to the problematic tool's owner and fix them, and were ready to have that battle at senior levels.

This was in a factory environment, so there were real $$ associated with bugs. And our team had a reputation for quality, and this was one of the reasons we had that reputation. All too often people use software as a workaround, and over the years there accumulate too many workarounds. We were, in a sense, a weapon upper management wielded to ensure other tools maintained their quality.
by FrostKiwi | 2025-10-14 01:33:49+00:00
> God forbid UI

Especially for UI, the amount of hours saved from e2e tests with playwright was huge for me. Tests for iOS Safari and Chrome Desktop, all with their own layout quirks from unexpected ways a layout adjustment plays out on a DPI x1 1920x1080 screen with mouse clicks vs DPI x2.75 900x1600 smartphone screen with touch inputs.

Especially here in Japan I have seen whole firms hired to UI tests a million different variations of these each release candidate and that is "the biggest waste of time in modern software engineering" I have seen so far. You can drown in trying to automate all forms of testing and human testing is important. But so is automating the basic sanity checks. Every tool can of course be misused in pursuit of an impractical extreme of either.
by oskarkk | 2025-10-14 01:34:13+00:00
Yes, as after it leaves the atmosphere and achieves that 98% of orbital speed, its trajectory wouldn't change much even if it exploded - its engines are turned off after ascent that takes ~9 minutes, then it free-falls for an hour to the other side of the Earth. They target a spot in the Indian Ocean near the west coast of Australia (it's coming from the west). In case of explosion debris would fall to the ocean sooner, farther to the west from Australia. More dangerous part of the flight is ascent (when it gains that speed), as its ground path is near some Caribbean islands, and it can cause problems like on flight 7:

> Around three minutes later, Ship 33 exploded over the Turks and Caicos Islands, causing debris to litter the Caribbean islands, Puerto Rico and the British Virgin Islands. While no injuries were reported, the debris caused minimal damage to infrastructure in Puerto Rico and the British Virgin Islands, and prompted airspace closures in the region for over an hour. The FAA ordered SpaceX to perform a mishap investigation into the breakup, grounding Starship until the inquiry was complete.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starship_flight_test_7#Mission...
by DaSHacka | 2025-10-14 01:35:55+00:00
At that point, you should force the pain on the individual themselves. Why should all of us be handicapped because there's a couple morons that can't set decent passwords and connect their devices directly to the internet?

Even if the device removed the capability for passwords and used key based authentication, connecting it directly to the internet means if there's ever a vulnerability, all that was for naught anyway.
by lgeek | 2025-10-14 01:36:06+00:00
This is very challenging, in about one year the biggest recorded DDoS attack has increased from 5 Tbps to almost 30.

Almost all of the DDoS mitigation providers have been struggling for a few weeks because they just don't have enough edge capacity.

And normal hosting companies that are not focused on DDoS mitigation also seem to have had issues, but with less impact to other customers as they'll just blackhole addresses under larger attacks. For example, I've seen all connections to / from some of my services at Hetzner time out way more frequently than usual, and some at OVH too. Then one of my smaller hosting providers got hit with an attack of at least 1 Tbps which saturated a bunch of their transit links.

Cloudflare and maybe a couple of the other enterprise providers (Gcore?) operate at a large enough scale to handle these attacks, but all the smaller ones (who tend to have more affordable rates and more application-specific filters for sensitive applications that can't deal with much leakage) seem to be in quite a bad spot right now. Cloudflare Magic Transit pricing supposedly starts at around $4k / month, and it would really suck if that became the floor for being able to run a non-HTTP service online.

Something like Team Cymru's UTRS service (with Flowspec support) could potentially help to mitigate attacks at the source, but residential ISPs and maybe the T1s would need to join it, and I don't see that happening anytime soon.
by symbolicAGI | 2025-10-14 01:36:07+00:00
Proving program correctness is not easy. For example, one must prove the correctness of the entire dependency supply chain that the target program might directly or indirectly call. Sure, the proofs of those dependencies are to a degree reusable, but would likely need to be re-proved for each distinct set of parameters.

And on the other hand, TDD shows that having expectations of the results before coding the procedure is a good thing. Not necessarily proving the implementation correct but TDD is more likely to produce correct code.
by DoesntMatter22 | 2025-10-14 01:36:20+00:00
We put far more money into healthcare and education, by a literal order of magnitude.

US spends 1.75 trillion on education per year, and 2.12 trillion on healthcare. People make it out like we aren't putting a ton of money into this stuff when those are literally are two biggest expenses. Space X is a drop in the bucket compared to that.
by echelon | 2025-10-14 01:36:31+00:00
This is unacceptable.

Google needs to be broken up. Apple too.

The lack of antitrust enforcement is a clown show.

We have no choice in the most important computing category in the world. It's a duopoly and they have everyone in straightjackets - consumers, companies, competitors, governments, ...

A huge percentage of the world's thoughts and economy flow through mobile. And two companies own it.

Ma Bell was nothing compared to this.
by zbentley | 2025-10-14 01:38:02+00:00
I didn’t downvote you, but the “this tool is bad and if you take the time to argue with me you’re a Rust cultist” line is a bit tiresome. Damned if you do, damned if you don’t.

It’s a bit like if anyone who said you should switch to desktop Linux got yelled at for being in the pocket of Big Systemd.

“if you like it, use it” is well and good, but haranguing people who explain why they like/use what they use is just as lame as the purported cult defense of uv or whatever tool is popular.

I dunno man, fads and stupid fixations happen in software sometimes, but most of the time hyped tools are hyped because they’re better.
by evolighting | 2025-10-14 01:38:51+00:00
I don't know what you are talking about

In China, most locally manufactured brands seem to vanish after roughly two decades — whether in clothing, food, daily necessities, automobiles, or electronics. Yet, global brands such as Coca-Cola, Nike, Adidas, P&G, Unilever, Colgate, Mercedes-Benz, BMW, Audi (collectively known as “BBA” in China), and even Nokia, dominate the market;

Interestingly, many European companies were eventually overtaken by their American counterparts — Nokia for example.

We’re not even talking about computers and smartphones—when it comes to these sectors, the U.S. simply won’t allow anyone else to take the lead. The market is dominated almost entirely by just a few platforms: Windows, macOS, iOS, and Android.
by davesque | 2025-10-14 01:39:24+00:00
Dependency management has always felt complicated. However, environment management I think is actually way simpler than people realize. Python basically just walks up directories trying to find its packages dir. A python "env" is just a copy of the python binary in its own directory. That's pretty much it. Basically all difficulties I've ever had with Python environments have been straightened out by going back to that basic understanding. I feel like the narrative about virtualenvs has always seemed scary but the reality really isn't.
by amluto | 2025-10-14 01:39:38+00:00
I skimmed the docs. It appears that this is a mechanism whereby a developer can restrict what their app can do via some configuration in Xcode. This seems almost unbelievably weak — developers want more privileges for their app, not fewer (especially developers of semi-malicious tracker-style SDKs), and the app sandbox seems entirely capable of, say, allowing a document editor app to open a document in a separate sandbox.
by dotnet00 | 2025-10-14 01:39:43+00:00
I would love such a society, but I think the way space funding has been in most parts of the world shows that most people are just not good judges of what is and is not worth spending on.

It seems very few people actually understand the importance of funding R&D that isn't directly improving their life, such that it takes some stubborn rich people to actually show that something is worth doing. Kind of like other countries all working on Falcon and Starship inspired rockets after seeing that the concepts can work.

As other examples, we have particle accelerators (everyone knows about the colliders like LHC and assumes they're luxury projects with no relevance to improving lives, yet they led to the development and side-by-side refinement of synchrotron light sources, which are very important for modern science) and medical tech like what led up to mRNA vaccines and Ozempic.

I would say we need a society that trusts experts and also holds said experts accountable, but then again, most of SpaceX's founding employees were not conventional aerospace experts, which was part of why they were able to question a lot of the corrupt/inefficient practices that traditional aerospace people dismissed as being standard and necessary practice.
by 3eb7988a1663 | 2025-10-14 01:41:49+00:00
Solid take. Do modern day battleships have programmers re-writing core OS components? Hopefully in a few hundred years, we have a lot of the basics locked down so you only need people who are good in working with expertly crafted tools in the field.

There were also call-outs to the facility where the Doctor was created. Sounded like a dedicated research installation which must be full of programmers.