MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by unnouinceput | 2025-10-15 01:07:41+00:00
Go ahead and do it. Put the code at your convenience on github. I don't care about your livestream, you can do it whenever. What I want is an app that I can install on my smartphone, Android, and that I can have my son do it as well and we play together. I am giving you a generous one week, should be more than enough for your "AI can do it easier". I did it in a month, and I put like 120 hours during that time. You get close to those 120 hours or over, you fail this "challenge accepted". Have fun.
by greenapple656 | 2025-10-15 01:07:45+00:00
It's clear leadership hasn't ever really cared about the climate, but thank you so much for sharing this - it really encapsulates what so many of us are feeling. I used to be really excited about AI, and then normies who only cared about making money fast took over, and now we get all the environmental destruction and surveillance the letter talks about. Hoping this makes some waves.
by scarecrowbob | 2025-10-15 01:08:04+00:00
I'm a citizen and describing speech I may engage in such as saying that Kirk “devoted his entire life spreading racist, xenophobic, misogynistic rhetoric” as something that the government doesn't approve of creates a chilling standard for my own speech.

So my speech, you authoritarian jerk. I should be able to say stuff like that- why the fuck should the government get to say what is okay for folks to say?
by ajross | 2025-10-15 01:08:09+00:00
Not sure where you're going with this. Obviously the immigrants who were speaking are the ones whose speech is being regulated by the government.

If you want to argue that immigrants don't have protection under the first amendment, clearly they do per centuries of jurisprudence.

If you want to argue that this is one of those "no freedom from consequences" situations, recognize that this isn't a private party. You or I can cancel someone by refusing to deal with them, but the government is expressly prohibited from from doing so by the clear text of the first amendment.
by pants2 | 2025-10-15 01:08:15+00:00
My friends and I rented a Wagoneer and found that the electronic feature to flip the rear seats down worked while there were people in those seats, while the vehicle was in motion!

So of course every hour when the boys weren't paying attention POP the driver would unlatch their seats and headrests lmao

Horrible safety guardrails but a good time was had by all.
by glommer | 2025-10-15 01:08:50+00:00
Yes, this is (one of) the point(s) you raised. You said there was a public an "unpleasant fight" (never happened) because of "criticism of SQLite" on my part. I calmly explained that such thing never took place. I have a preference towards Open models but never criticized SQLite (as in stated that they are wrong). Where does the unpleasant fight comes from?

Your claim that we are doing something ethically wrong seems to be informed by your pre-existing opinion of me, that itself derives from the "unpleasant fight" (that never happened).

As for the tagline we use, most people don't get the impression that there is any violation of ethics or respect. This is evidenced by other people's reaction here. You do, and you are within your right. I can't, unfortunately, please everybody.

Some people are more relevant than others, though: in this case, if the authors of SQLite expressed their opinion to me that this crosses a line in their view, I'd change it, without blinking an eye.

I have a tremendous respect for them, and we want our messaging to convey nothing but that!
by manwe150 | 2025-10-15 01:08:53+00:00
Critical applications like that used to use ADA to get much more sophisticated checking than just bounds. No certified engineer would (should) ever design a safety critical system without multiple “unreachable” fail safe mechanisms

Next they’ll have to tell me about how they had to turn off inlining because it creates copies of code which adds some dead branches. Bounds checks are just normal inlined code. Any bounds checked language worth its salt has that coverage for all that stuff already.
by weitendorf | 2025-10-15 01:09:51+00:00
I fully agree with this take and think a lot of people at this point are really just being uncharitable to those using AI productively + unwilling to admit their own faults when they fail to see this.

How can anybody who has managed or worked with inexperienced engineers, or StackOverflow developers, not see how helpful AI is for delegating the kinds of tasks with that particular flavor of content and scope? And how can anybody who is currently working with those kinds of developers not see how much it's helping them improve the quality of their work? (and yes, it's extremely frustrating to see AI used poorly or for people to submit code for review that they did not even review or even understand themselves. But the fact that that's even possible, that it often times still works, really tells you something... And given the right feedback, most offenders do eventually understand why they ought not to do this, I think)

Even for more experienced engineers, for the kind of "unimportant / low priority, uninteresting" work that requires a lot of context and knowledge to get done but isn't really a good use of experienced engineers' time, AI can really lower the barrier to starting and completing those tasks. Let's say my codebase doesn't have any docstrings or unit tests - I can feed it into an LLM and immediately get mediocre versions of all of that and just edit it into being good enough to merge. Or let's say I have an annoying unicode parsing bug, a problem with my regex, or something like that which I can reproduce in tests or a dev environment: a lot of the time I can just give the LLM the part of the code I suspect the bug resides within, tell it what the bug symptoms are and ask it to fix it, and validate the fix.

To be honest and charitable to those who do struggle to use AI this way, since it's most likely just a theory of mind issue (they don't understand what the AI does and doesn't know, and what context it needs to understand them and give them what they want), it could very well be influenced by being somewhere on the autism spectrum or just difficulty with social skills. Since AI is essentially a fresh wipe of the same stranger every time you start a conversation with it (unless you use "memory" features designed for consumer chat rather than coding), it never really gets to know you or understand your quirks like most people that regularly interact with those with social difficulties. So I suppose to a certain extent it requires them to "mask" or interact in a way they're unfamiliar with when dealing with computer tools.

A lot of people for whatever reason seem also to have decided to become emotionally/personally invested in "AI stupid" to the point that they will just flat out refuse to believe there is value in being able to type some little compiler error or stacktrace into a textbox and 80% of the time get a custom fix in 10% of the time it would have taken to do the same thing on google search+stackoverflow.
by schoen | 2025-10-15 01:10:17+00:00
I also want to mention that several governments probably have large-scale tapping infrastructure to passively record Internet traffic. However, they like people not to pay attention to that or think about it (because, you know, we might try to protect ourselves or even try to get them to stop!). This is especially true when your communications cross national borders, as many governments have promoted a theory that normal privacy rules (that they might accept in other contacts) shouldn't apply at the border or outside of their territory.

HTTPS is a really important defense against this, but it's really hard to know when it worked or when it was relevant, because the wiretappers weren't announcing what they were doing and similarly don't usually announce when it's being thwarted.

There are lots of limitations there. For example, traffic analysis may sometimes allow identifying pairs of people who communicate with each other in low-latency ways like a real-time call, or possibly also those who communicate in a distinctive way in high-latency ways. It may also allow determining, for example, which Wikipedia page you looked at, because the pages are different sizes and contain different numbers of images, so the timing and volume of your browser communications could be distinctive depending on which page you browsed to. But, if you don't do the HTTPS part, then you're basically just saying "we're going to allow anyone who controls network infrastructure to permanently record 100% of all communications in an easily searchable way, if they so choose".
by robbrown451 | 2025-10-15 01:10:48+00:00
I'm having trouble understanding what they want to "upskill" those people to do.

What skills won't be replaced? The only ones I can think of either have a large physical component, or are only doable by a tiny fraction of the current workforce.

As for the ones with a physical component (plumbers being the most cited), the cognitive parts of the job (the "skilled" part of skilled labor) can be replaced while having the person just following directions demonstrated onscreen for them. And of course, the robots aren't far behind, since the main hard part of making a capable robot is the AI part.
by potato3732842 | 2025-10-15 01:10:50+00:00
>What does this even mean? Why the hell does it have to be so hard to get anything done in this country?

Because some engineering specialty lobbyist wants it to be that way to drive business to his clients, he cooks up some narrative about how more review will save the planet and HN takes it at face value.

You see this crap with every sort of permitting. Except perhaps in the rare cases it constrains the biggest entities (e.g. DuPont dumping crap in the river or whatever) all these BS processes and requirements do is raise the richness floor of who can play the game. The BigCos can pay for the pretexts to get the permission they need to keep doing whatever, free from the competition from everyone down-market who can't afford that.
by Brajeshwar | 2025-10-15 01:11:43+00:00
Writing CSS for Markdown is Writing CSS for the standard HTML elements. This is where those Classless CSS works pretty well. Pick the one you like and then add your own. That should keep the CSS file size low enough to be negligible and sometime even embed in your HTML.

- <https://classless.de>

- <https://github.com/dbohdan/classless-css>
by kovac | 2025-10-15 01:12:01+00:00
I think this is the right place to start.

A free OS will empower developers to implement technical workarounds that could trick these apps into working there. If the OS is tightly controlled, we have no recourse.

Even in the worst case scenario, we could use a cheap big-tech-approved phone for these applications (a glorified digital token) and use the free phone for everything else. When there's enough adoption and trust in the new phone, non-technical avenues are available to influence these organizations to accept the alternative.
by phil21 | 2025-10-15 01:12:45+00:00
The issue is capital expense.

Buying a bunch of expensive equipment and operating it 10 hours a day vs. 24 hours a day is usually not economical. The uses where this make sense are quite rare.

For example training AI models is often cited - but when you're buying $1B of GPUs to stuff in a datacenter that have a 3 year useful lifespan - you are effectively cutting your amortization schedule in half. It would require some really expensive energy to make that pencil out.

Energy storage of various types are probably the currently best bet, but those also have the same problem. Vehicle charging is a clear win, but also a low hanging fruit that is already well in play.
by sciencejerk | 2025-10-15 01:12:56+00:00
SS7 telcom vulns still seem to be prevelant in 2025:

Femtocells and Fake Base Stations Attackers deploy femtocells — small cellular base stations — or fake base stations, commonly known as IMSI catchers, to intercept SS7 traffic. A modified femtocell can act as a man-in-the-middle, capturing signaling messages between a phone and the network.

Fake base stations mimic legitimate cell towers, tricking devices into connecting and relaying SS7 messages to the attacker’s system.

IMSI catchers exploit a known security vulnerability in the GSM specification, which requires the handset to authenticate to the network but does not require the network to authenticate to the handset. They broadcast a stronger signal than legitimate cell towers to lure mobile phones into connecting. Once connected, an IMSI catcher can force the transmission of the International Mobile Subscriber Identity (IMSI) and compel the connected mobile station to use no encryption or easily breakable encryption.

For 3G and LTE networks, sophisticated IMSI catcher attacks may involve downgrading the connection to less secure non-LTE network services to bypass enhanced security features. For example, a hacker might deploy a fake base station near a target to capture their IMSI and initiate SS7 queries.

https://www.how2lab.com/tech/mobile-communication/ss7-vulner...
by warkdarrior | 2025-10-15 01:14:12+00:00
If you want your bank to take the liability for any monetary losses from your account getting hacked (for example, through spyware using accessibility on Android), then you have to be OK with their requirements.

If you don't like their requirements, you need to take the liability yourself. You could use PayPal or a stablecoin to store your money.
by matthewdgreen | 2025-10-15 01:14:36+00:00
It's not at all clear how easy it is to obtain a user's search history, when users don't explicitly log in to those services (e.g., incognito/Private browsing), and don't keep history on their local device. I've been trying to find a single example of a court case where this happened, and my Google/ChatGPT searches are coming up completely empty. Tell me if you can find one.

The closest I can find is "keyword warrants" where police ask for users who searched on a given term, but that's not quite the same thing as an exhaustive search history.

Certainly my personal intuition is that historically there has been a lot of default privacy for non-logged in "incognito" web search, which used to be most search -- and is also I think why we came to trust search so much. I expect that will change going forward, and most LLMs require user logins right from the jump.

As far as the "I can see no reason" why LLMs should be treated differently than email, well, there are plenty of good reasons why we should. If you're saying "we can't change the law," you clearly aren't paying attention to how the law has been changing around tech priorities like cryptocurrency recently. AI is an even bigger priority, so a lot of opportunity for big legal changes. Now's the time to make proposals.
by alphabettsy | 2025-10-15 01:14:40+00:00
> Meanwhile, a ProPublica review of federal data found that more than $40 million in grants awarded by the National Institutes of Health for dozens of autism-related research projects were canceled under Kennedy’s watch. Some had been awarded to universities the administration is now targeting, while others ran afoul of Trump’s “anti-woke” priorities by mentioning gender and other verboten terms. Among them was a grant to Harvard University to use data on nearly half a million Israeli children to evaluate whether men’s exposure to air pollution affects the risk of having a child with autism. (A small number of grants have been recently reinstated.) A survey of researchers conducted by the Autism Science Foundation, which tallied cuts to training grants and the anticipated cuts to future grants over the next few years, estimated that the total loss of funding could be tens of millions more.

https://www.propublica.org/article/rfk-jr-autism-environment...

So they cut funding then put it back for possibly fewer studies, but with new press release?
by slashdev | 2025-10-15 01:15:40+00:00
> They just use the name for promotional/aspirational purposes. Which feels incredibly icky.

The aim is to be compatible with sqlite, and a drop-in replacement for it, so I think it's fair use.

> Also, this is a VC backed project. Everyone has to eat, but I suspect that Turso will not go out of its way to offer a Public Domain offering or 50 year support in the way that SQLite has.

It's MIT license open-source. And unlike sqlite, encourages outside contribution. For this reason, I think it can "win".
by foolfoolz | 2025-10-15 01:15:46+00:00
it’s more than that. it’s any device that can present itself as a possible base station. this is how trumps lawyer was caught in a place he claimed to not be: https://www.reuters.com/article/world/special-counsel-has-ev...

this also helped confirm the identity of the 2022 killer in idaho https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_University_of_Idaho_murde...
by nocoiner | 2025-10-15 01:16:37+00:00
I’m aware of the merger, but I literally can’t hear a difference between the words. I certainly pronounce them the same way.

I also think merry-marry-Mary are all pronounced identically. The only way I can conceive of a difference between them is to think of an exaggerated Long Island accent, which, yeah, I guess is what makes it an accent.
by weitendorf | 2025-10-15 01:17:12+00:00
Because golang is so verbose LLMs are still extremely useful at using it without feeling like you're doing data entry or working as a typist. Converting JSON to a properly typed Go struct or doing the 3-5 things required to create+specify+send+deserialize/parse an HTTP request (with explicit error handling) is about 20x faster when I make an LLM do it, and it makes it so I don't dread or avoid those kinds of tasks.
by alwa | 2025-10-15 01:17:25+00:00
I feel like I hear people referring to Wayne Ma’s reporting for The Information to that effect.

https://www.theinformation.com/articles/apple-fumbled-siris-...

> Distrust between the two groups got so bad that earlier this year one of Giannandrea’s deputies asked engineers to extensively document the development of a joint project so that if it failed, Federighi’s group couldn’t scapegoat the AI team.

> It didn’t help the relations between the groups when Federighi began amassing his own team of hundreds of machine-learning engineers that goes by the name Intelligent Systems and is run by one of Federighi’s top deputies, Sebastien Marineau-Mes.
by next_xibalba | 2025-10-15 01:18:01+00:00
> Supreme Court said this was quite fine

So, by your own words, it's not illegal. But, in reality, the SC temporarily issued a stay of an injunction issued by a lower court. That case is still active. Again, I ask, if the majority of illegal immigrants hail from countries in the Americas that are South of the U.S., would we not expect the majority of deportees to also be from those same countries? As far as I know, there are not millions of illegal immigrants in the U.S. who originated from Western Europe. Please do correct me if I'm wrong.

> your Supreme Court

Are they not also your supreme court? If not, why are you so concerned about the enforcement of U.S. laws?

> And what violence and threats are you referring to?

Here's a smattering: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6]

> Wearing a mask is not a reasonable response

...in your opinion. But, to return to your original claim: is it illegal?

> In terms of what a jackboot is...

I know what a jackboot is. I just wanted to give you an opportunity to explicate your implication. I think most readers are desensitized to the comparison of the enforcement of laws long on the books with Nazism.

[1] https://www.dhs.gov/news/2025/09/24/dhs-issues-statement-tar...

[2] https://www.cbsnews.com/chicago/news/grand-jury-marimar-mart...

[3] https://www.fox4news.com/news/alvarado-ice-attack-6-women-ar...

[4] https://www.reuters.com/world/us/facebook-takes-down-page-th...

[5] https://www.justice.gov/usao-cdca/pr/federal-grand-jury-char...

[6] https://www.mercurynews.com/2025/05/21/san-jose-man-facing-d...
by schoen | 2025-10-15 01:19:01+00:00
The legal theory is that you, as a citizen, have a clear free speech right to say that, but that foreigners outside the U.S. don't have any free speech right at all under the U.S. constitution to say that. (In a related legal doctrine, denying people a visa in retaliation for their specific actions is officially "not a punishment".)

I think this theory is pretty broken, but I also find that there are a lot of things where longstanding legal doctrines give the government humongous amounts of power and discretion, and they often did not just, like, make up the concept just 10 minutes ago. Often it's arguably been the rule for many decades.

The thing that I'm more familiar with in this category is border searches. My mom was surprised to hear that people's devices (including U.S. citizens' devices) were being searched at the border without suspicion, something that would obviously violate the fourth amendment in a regular domestic context. Something my mom didn't know, but I happened to know from having studied and written about this in the past, is that we have legal precedents going back decades that specifically say that that is a power that the government has.

Now, I would like to see a rule that the fourth amendment does apply at the border, but we've been far away from that for years, with important cases in 2004 and 1985 and even longer ago saying that it doesn't. (In this case, it is held not to apply to either citizens or non-citizens in the border search context.)

So, I would encourage people to have a broader sense of historical perspective about the staggering amount of power and discretion that the government has repeatedly been given, and the considerable number of limitations that have been held to apply to various legal rights, while also opposing this and trying to change it.

Edit: In terms of foreigners' political expression, I believe we've had rules in the U.S. at least since the 1920s that foreigners ought to be excluded from moving here, or even from visiting, for some kinds of radical politics. I also find this notion concerning, I just want to point out that it's in some sense a 100-year-old concept rather than like a 1-month-old concept.
by techblueberry | 2025-10-15 01:20:23+00:00
I think we have too many billionaires and not enough millionaires.

I’ve seen growing arguments, even on the right about wealth inequality being an issue. Like specifically too much of the S&P 500 is tied up in 10 companies.

And this video on a bro-podcast where a right wing marketer/economist talks about wealth consolidation: https://youtu.be/ajGmL1gus9A?si=5Vf4dW_7jtK8A5y2

Specifically something like “I’m right-wing on income but not on wealth”
by QuiEgo | 2025-10-15 01:21:02+00:00
> Rust has had ten years since 1.0. It changes in backward compatible ways. For some people, they want no changes at all, so it’s important to nail down which sense is meant.

I’d love to see rust be so stable that MSRV is an anachronism. I want it to be unthinkable you wouldn’t have any reason not to support Rust from forever ago because the feature set is so stable.
by scarecrowbob | 2025-10-15 01:21:13+00:00
Not to understate the actual reason that I find authoritarian controls on speech outrageous: I 100% agree that it's wrong to revoke visas over politically-protected speech.

I just find it easier to communicate "a basic sense of self interest" to the sociopaths who are happy to see state power used against strangers their country is hosting. If the state can do it to those folks, they will eventually do it to you and I.

It used to be the case that treating strangers and foreigners -better- than we might treat ourselves was a goal for humans. You can read it in the religious texts of the assholes I live around who pretend that their religion should rule all the subjects of the land they have occupied.