MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
Show HN: I made a game that's like Connections x Mini Crossword
by DJSnackySnack | 2025-10-23 16:02:17+00:00
Hello HN - I’m a lover of word games and word play (I even won the New Yorker caption contest.)

My new game combines both: https://puzzle-brothers.boondoggle.studio/puzzles/linchpin

How it works:

You’re given 4 crossword style clues. Each answer overlaps two phrases with a shared "linchpin" word in the middle.

Example clue: Where do plants go to cut loose? Answer: “Green House” + “House **Party” → **Green House Party.

Build four answers from a shared word bank, but watch out for red herrings.

I’d love to know what you think!
by dragonwriter | 2025-10-23 16:02:23+00:00
> And what I am asking is precisely if there’s any reason other than that.

The author is explicit that that is the reason for which additional information is provided. So, the natural reading is from the perspective of the author in promoting the additional learning material, no, there is no other reason that is the focus of their promotion.

If you are looking for some more direct, specific, or immediate payoff, I’m sure there are lots of other things tailored to you.
by suralind | 2025-10-23 16:02:30+00:00
I’ve been adopting jj for my personal projects for 1-2 months and have been very happy with it. One downside is if you move back to edit older revisions, it’s very easy to accidentally append something that was added to .gitignore in the meantime. I suppose it’s a relatively unique problem. Other than that I definitely like it, but my git knowledge accumulated over the years is still much larger than jj.

I’m going to be slowly adopting it for work.
by notmyjob | 2025-10-23 16:02:32+00:00
Where I live, private sector food programs are very healthy, and so it seems unlikely this will be much of any local impact beyond retailers’ bottom lines. For example, the Taco Bell drive thru down the street from me has a huge sign “WE TAKE EBT!!!” which I assume corresponds to the local consumers being largely subsidized chalupa eaters. I wonder if chalupas will decline in value from $7 dollars or whatever artificially inflated price they’ve reached, back down to their old timey price of $3? (I’m not sure I have those prices exactly right as I’ve only purchased Taco Bell once or twice since in the past few decades. I confess I don’t get EBT yet, so my perspective is a naive one. It may be the case that chalupas are a better value proposition than Safeway prices in the suburban food desert where I live. There’s certainly a dearth of drive thrus.)
Show HN: How Software Fails-A book about complex system failures(sample chapter)
by enginyoyen | 2025-10-23 16:02:54+00:00
Based on Richard Cook's research on complex system failures, I wrote a book exploring why disasters like Knight Capital's $440M loss happen when every component functions correctly.

Free sample chapters: https://leanpub.com/how-software-fails

The book explores patterns behind complex system failures—from cosmic rays flipping bits in voting machines to the Therac-25 radiation overdoses. Key insight: traditional "root cause analysis" fundamentally misunderstands how these systems actually fail—they emerge from interactions between components that were individually functioning correctly.

Feel free to grab the sample chapter and give it a try.
by mimerz | 2025-10-23 16:03:04+00:00
I am a big fan of code verification. But from what I read, the process suggested is complicated. We already have the integrity flag to protect script. What would be needed to make it watertight is to change the hashing to include another token, maybe delivered via nameservice, so that the browser can verify it. Case closed. Minor change in the browser, complete protection against manipulation.
by immibis | 2025-10-23 16:03:12+00:00
That's always been the case. Jailbreaking your phone is also breaking TOS. Sideloading apps on iPhone by using the developer features is breaking TOS. Almost anything that gives a corporation less money or control over you is against that corporation's TOS. That's not the law, though, and we need to grow a collective spine.

... It's a lot easier to have a spine about risking getting banned from a service if getting banned from that service wouldn't destroy your life.
Show HN: I Made InfoBeatLive – The Operating System for Startup Success
by abdurrahman9955 | 2025-10-23 16:03:28+00:00
Hi HN!

I'm the founder of InfoBeatLive. I built this platform to help founders avoid early startup failure.

InfoBeatLive acts as an AI-powered operating system for startups — helping you with strategies in marketing, analyze product-market fit, and track performance with real-time insights.

I created this because I noticed most startups fail not because of the idea, but because of a lack of clear strategy and validation. I’d love your feedback, especially from early-stage founders and builders.

https://infobeatlive.com

Thanks for checking it out!
by Enginerrrd | 2025-10-23 16:03:28+00:00
That's unfortunate. My personal sense is that while agentic LLM's are not going to get us close to AGI, a few relatively modest architectural changes to the underlying models might actually do that, and I do think mimicry of our own self-referential attention is a very important component of that.

While the current AI boom is a bubble, I actually think that AGI nut could get cracked quietly by a company with even modest resources if they get lucky on the right fundamental architectural changes.
by UncleEntity | 2025-10-23 16:03:41+00:00
Oh, it's worse than that. The companies who moved production overseas are the ones who taught them the advanced manufacturing technologies necessary to make the now offshorn products (looking at you, Apple).

While being able to walk into a Walmart and buy a microwave for $20 is good for 'society' its not so good if you want to onshore microwave production and have to compete against these 'Everyday Low Prices' coming in from overseas.
by ux266478 | 2025-10-23 16:03:41+00:00
It's correct to underline the heterogeneous nature of programming, but you don't go far enough. What you speak of is only one singular manifestation of a programming role. In this sense, what you're hiring for is expertise with a specific ecosystem, usually because you want to leverage some pre-existing piece of software that exists in that ecosystem, often times due to legacy code. This is not universal.
by tromp | 2025-10-23 16:04:16+00:00
It's possible that I messed up in transcribing from my working code

K = A (A A) (A (A A) A A A A A); S = A (A (A A (A A (A A))(A (A (A A (A A)))))) A A;

that assumes application is left associative.

> So, something like this? > let A = x => y => z => () => x()(z())(y()(w=>z()));

The javascript code I linked to would change an application like x(z) in A's definition to x ((a) => z(a)), which is really just an eta-expansion of the argument, and would similarly treat the other 2 applications in the definition.
by jandrese | 2025-10-23 16:04:16+00:00
"Business is a good game—lots of competition and a minimum of rules. You keep score with money" -- Nolan Bushnell

Once you get that wealthy the money is more of a disk measuring contest. There is no productive way for one person to really use money of that magnitude, the best they can do is dump it into stocks, bonds, real-estate, etc..., but nothing that really moves the economy. It's a big failure from an economic standpoint. Lots of "dead" money not being productively used.
by immibis | 2025-10-23 16:04:28+00:00
I run an email server with no specific spam filter. Sometimes I get spam. Then I add a filter on my end to delete it and move on. It's nowhere near as bad as people proclaim. Neither is deliverability, for that matter, even after I forgot to set an SPF record and some random internet server sent a bunch of spam on my behalf (which I know because I got the bounces).
by jongjong | 2025-10-23 16:04:47+00:00
Yes, it's impossible for a distributed system to figure out the collaborative intent when it sees conflicting changes... Even the people who made the changes may not 'know' what is the correct way to resolve the conflict... For that to happen, people involved would have to communicate and agree on either option or they would have to agree on a compromise. This problem cannot be solved automatically because computers cannot read minds (yet).

This is why I like using granular data structures where each value can be updated in an all-or-nothing manner and if one person's change overwrites another, the person whose change was overwritten will just assume that the other person made an update shortly after and the amount overwritten is minimal.
by danans | 2025-10-23 16:05:07+00:00
> If it gets more expensive for the US to borrow due to debt load, consumer credit will stay or get more expensive. This will, very likely, slow the economy due to increased cost of mortgages, auto loans, and unsecured credit.

Probably, but for sobering reasons, maybe less so than in the past, because because 50% of US consumer spending is by the top 10%, and the top 10% is far less dependent on credit for their spending.

A society where there is a more balanced distribution of spending power would be more affected by a consumer credit collapse, but the treasuries of such a society might be more desirable anyways.
by staplung | 2025-10-23 16:05:27+00:00
The "conflict-free" part of the name is misleading. The conflict "resolution" means having some deterministic algorithm such that all nodes eventually converge to the same state, but it won't necessarily mean that the end state looks like it's conflict-free to a human. The algorithm you choose to implement will determine what happens in the editing case imagined; various answers are possible, perhaps most of which would be classified as conflicting changes by a human who looked at the final result. The pitch for CRDTs is "we won't trouble you with the replication details and will eventually converge all the changes. The tradeoff is that sometimes we'll do the wrong thing."

That tradeoff is fine for some things but not others. There's a reason why git et al require human intervention for merge conflicts.

The article is doing a classic bait-and-switch: start with a motivating example then dodge the original question without pointing out that CRDTs may be a very bad choice for collaborative editing. E.g. maybe it's bad for code and legalese but fine for company-issued blog posts.
by sanyam-khurana | 2025-10-23 16:05:58+00:00
Yes, I maintained a cookie-cutter template for over a decade, and it was a pain for me to get it updated. I wanted to get something newer, like a copier, which eliminates the pain of updating, while I can focus on building things.

I have also added temporal (though still testing it) since it's getting a lot popular these days.
by tech_ken | 2025-10-23 16:06:03+00:00
There used to be some darkweb marketplaces that were extremely reliable for psychedelics, for example "The Majestic Garden" was an old PHP message board which specialized in psychedelics and had a strict whitelist about what substances could be sold. TMG has since shut down unfortunately, but there are lots of other providers. Some "well-known" manufacturers used to hang around TMG, and if a listing on some other site mentions that it's their LSD then IMO it's a good place to start. General methodology is to get a burner laptop running some secure *nix OS (ie. Tails), acquire some Monero, navigate to an appropriate marketplace via Tor, and make your purchase. Use your real address and name for the shipping; it seems scary but in the US it's the most secure way (least likely to trigger a warrant being issued to search your package). Once that's done you head over to dancesafe.org on your normal laptop and order what they recommend for LSD reagent testing. Then you wait for everything to arrive, follow the instructions in the reagent testing kit, and if everything comes out "okay" then you're good to go.

In general it's fairly rare for someone to sell "fake" or "cut" LSD. This is for two broad reasons:

1. LSD isn't addictive in the same way as some other illegal substances, so there's much less profit in faking it. If you sell someone fake LSD and they have an awful trip they're never going to buy from you again and you've burned a profit stream. If you sell someone coke cut with meth they're probably going to come back anyways, because they're hooked on the drug.

2. The things you might adulterate or fake LSD with (ex. NBOMe) are also somewhat difficult and expensive to make, so it's not like one would really save much time or money. If you're trying to burn someone in an LSD sale, the simplest and most profitable thing to do would be to just sell empty blotter paper, rather than wasting research chemicals you could potentially sell to some psychonaut with the correct label.

With that said NBOMe and some other synthetics have been cropping up in the last 20-ish years. If someone at a party or festival is selling single tabs that's definitely the place where you might get burned with NBOMe, since by the time your trip ends the dealer will be long gone. In general it's always best to test everything you ingest, and dancesafe.org is definitely the place to get info on how to test stuff.
by immibis | 2025-10-23 16:06:28+00:00
Valve tried this. But there's no class action arbitration. Meaning that instead of a single class action suit, they had thousands of individual arbitration cases and they were actually begging people to sue them instead. So we could just do that. If they want mandatory arbitration they can have mandatory arbitration. From half of us, just in case it doesn't work.
by gjsman-1000 | 2025-10-23 16:06:43+00:00
You have a dirt path to your house and are therefore convinced the interstate highway system should allow direct residential driveways.

Gmail processes 376 billion emails per day. At that volume, even 0.1% spam getting through is 376 million messages. However, we're not talking about 0.1%, but 45.6% of email being spam globally. For Gmail, that's 171 billion spam messages daily. Congrats that your private server works at your scale. It's completely irrelevant, and only works because bad actors don't care about it.

Imagine though, if we even accepted spam culturally and handled it individually, as per your solution. That would mean spam can get through with brute force, which it can't right now, meaning that 45.6% would probably explode closer to 90%, 95%, or more overnight. It's only manageable at 45.6% for you because Gmail's spam filters are working overtime harming the economics.
by jimnotgym | 2025-10-23 16:06:54+00:00
There is a plan, but it is rather half baked and naive.

>putting the fear of Russia in Europe to pump up their defense spending

At the same time as refusing weapons sales to US allies and restricting intelligence sharing. Thereby forcing those countries to spend on European weapons rather than the US ones they have bought for the last 70 years. Doesn't sound great for the US tbh
by taeric | 2025-10-23 16:07:07+00:00
But not everyone reacted to trauma by going into denial? Some people had really crappy things happen to them. They did not deny this, necessarily. They just found a way to move to the next things.

And note, that it wasn't everyone. Some people did not find a way to move on. Worse, some people likely perpetuated their trauma on to others.
by bccdee | 2025-10-23 16:07:32+00:00
Interesting example! What role would you say clothing and housing play in "objective" survival? Humans can survive in space, given a space suit or capsule, and a small contingent of humans live in Antarctica by way of warm clothes and an insulated habitat. If we eliminate protective clothing from consideration, however, most of North America isn't even survivable during the winter.

Certainly the line is drawn somewhere, and if we really nail down our definitions, we can get to a place where we all agree where we're drawing that line. But at that point, all we've really established is consensus, not true objectivity. Conversely, if we can't agree on a set of definitions, objectivity becomes impossible to establish.

I'd argue that all we really mean by "objectivity" is "a strong consensus among informed individuals," which is (a) ultimately still subjective, strictly speaking, and (b) subjectively determined, since reasonable minds can disagree about where we draw the line on what is considered objective. At the end of the day, consensus is the most we can establish. We can't access any truly objective, perspectiveless reality.
by menaerus | 2025-10-23 16:07:39+00:00
> With "conventional RAII" you need to know if your pointer is the only pointer left to know whether to call the destructor. That requires some sort of pointer tracking.

That's not really conventional in terms of RAII - this is called a shared-ptr what you're describing. In "conventional RAII" there is no pointer tracking, RAII serves the purpose of releasing the resource what that is - it doesn't have to be anything, and most of the time it isn't since many classes aren't resource classes anyway.
by hypertexthero | 2025-10-23 16:07:39+00:00
If someone at Yamaha is reading this, could you please release a firmware update for the Yamaha Reface CP so that the toy piano setting plays the hidden grand piano sound instead?

To get the hidden piano sound:

1. Turn Reface CP off.

2. Turn piano sound knob so it rests in between any two settings.

3. Turn Reface CP on.

The Reface CP is one of my favorite small keys piano instruments, and I got one specifically for the hidden piano sound, but it’s annoying to have to go through the above steps and I’m not experienced enough to mod the circuitry.
by dh2022 | 2025-10-23 16:07:40+00:00
I have read it for a few years. And I learned that back then the Economist mission was something along the lines of a robust defense of international trade. Something like what the GP wrote....

I stopped subscribing to it when I realized that all of their economical analyses were 100% bogus. They managed to get better marks on political analyses. But these were not worth paying $40 / year.
by mullingitover | 2025-10-23 16:07:49+00:00
It's not just a structural advantage, it's a de facto suspension of the Constitution.

Political parties are in theory subordinate to the Constitution, but when the executors and interpreters of the law are first and foremost agents of a political party, and they refuse to be constrained by the Constitution, that's the ballgame. You have a self-coup.

What we are witnessing is the aftermath of the self-coup, the Constitution is just a polite fiction that must be given lip service to prevent the already massive protests from turning into an outright color revolution.
by close04 | 2025-10-23 16:07:50+00:00
> How do you distinguish between a terminal under the control of a scam center versus, say, a journalist who has traveled to the vicinity of the call center to interview people and make a report.

You are told by the local law enforcement and legal system? Starlink's obligation is only to assist local authorities as per their law. Maybe the local authorities are corrupt but that doesn't give Starlink a free pass from obeying their law.

> Neither terminal was bought in Myanmar.

Does it matter? Starlink does business there, in Myanmar. They offer an internet service. They were asked by the authorities to disable some terminals, and because they want to keep offering the service to other paying customers, they complied. There's no legal grey area here, not even a moral conundrum for Musk. He follows the law of the land, gets to still do business and make more money.

Point being, as long as Starlink wants to keep offering a service and make money in Myanmar the company has to obey local laws. The statement below [0] that started the thread was a kneejerk reaction, keyboard warrior style. Musk "didn't give the time of day" to Brazilian authorities and he was squeezed into compliance. Why fight when there's an easy way to keep making money?

> But the US (who has jurisdiction over Starlink) isn't bound by Mynamar laws, and (IMHO) shouldn't give the time of day to the requests of a junta

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45680818
by pizlonator | 2025-10-23 16:08:07+00:00
> It does seem to rhyme with how function calls work under the hood.

You're just overindexing on the fact that block "arguments" are called "arguments". In SSA with block arguments, you can pass data to a block without passing it as an argument. The arguments are just a way of expressing Phis.

And in Phi/Upsilon, this is valid:

MyBlock: X = Whatever(...) Upsilon(X, ^Y) Y = Phi()

Note how I'm using an upsilon to set the shadow variable of a Phi that's in the same block. You can't do that with block arguments.

These things just aren't the same at all. Saying that they are the same just shows that you don't get it.

> When people say equivalent, it is usually not in the mathematical sense, which would be meaningless here because all forms are turing complete anyway.

But they're not equivalent even in a mathematical sense.

> Take equivalent as--similarity that helps you understand A given you know B, and perhaps some of the wisdom from B translates to A.

If you want to understand these things, then focus on how they are so very different rather than brain damaging yourself into thinking they are similar
by aavshr | 2025-10-23 16:08:34+00:00
Thank you.

Yes, we support any endpoint that supports the completions API. And yes, Ollama might be the easiest to setup. The images should also work with qwen3-vl.

But if you run into any issues, please feel free to submit a bug report https://github.com/deta/surf/issues

Edit: fixed github issues link
by diego_moita | 2025-10-23 16:08:46+00:00
> Did they really vote for that?

Yes, even if they don't know it.

You don't sniff cocaine with the intention of getting addicted to it. But you get addicted if you take it and you should know that. So, in the end, you do sniff cocaine to get addicted.

You don't vote to a demagogue to get shafted. But you get shafted if you do so. Therefore ...
by kasey_junk | 2025-10-23 16:08:46+00:00
GMC probably doesn’t care about your opinion on what they put in new cars if you’ve conceded you aren’t going to buy one.

But I’d suggest to you that if GMC is not supporting Apple/Android projection it’s not because they want to support something simpler and more open. It’s because they want to own the whole system.

Who do you trust more to build quality software and not rent seek in that situation?
by walkabout | 2025-10-23 16:08:50+00:00
Say a prosecutor is elected and literally never prosecutes crimes. Any crime. Ever. Despite laws on the books stating they are, in some cases that have in-fact come up, required to. But this prosecutor keeps getting re-elected, and nobody enforces the laws about their having to bring certain cases.

Both of the following may be true:

1) The prosecutor is doing what a plurality of voters want.

2) The office of prosecutor is not functioning correctly, as defined by law (“has failed” or “is broken” would be other ways of saying this)
by taink | 2025-10-23 16:08:50+00:00
Well it did have to change its name from GAIM to Pidgin at some point because it infringed on "AIM" by AOL. And whether or not Pidgin was fully "TOS-compliant" (which it might have been depending on the service we'd be looking at) is not as relevant as whether these terms would have been actually legally enforceable or not.