MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by DecoPerson | 2025-10-05 12:15:10+00:00
I agree. Making deals with laptop manufacturers to put their trademark on keyboards is an unhealthy-for-society abuse of their market power and should be treated as such in every jurisdiction that they trade in.

However, I've had no issue remapping it to the Context Menu key on the Chinese Lenovo Xiao Xin laptop I bought recently. It shows up in the PowerToys keyboard remapper tool as an F23 key. (Yes, there are more than 12 F key codes! I believe there is 24 in Windows.)

Other OSes will not even be able to say things like "Press your Copilot key to open FEDORA SEARCH" or whatever without being cease'n'desisted to high heaven.

Terrible.
by Dusseldorf | 2025-10-05 12:15:59+00:00
Speaking as an experienced desktop .NET Dev, we've avoided it due to years of instability and no real confidence it'll get fully adopted. We've stuck with WPF, which is certainly a bit warty, but ultimately fine. If starting fresh at this point I'd give a real look at Avalonia, seems like they've got their head on their shoulders and are in it for the long haul.
by jleyank | 2025-10-05 12:16:49+00:00
One could argue that it wasn’t the internet that was the ultimate catalyst, it was the cpu performance. There were various networks in place before the internet (really the World Wide Web) appeared. But the iron was too slow to do what’s done now.

Catalog systems existed forever. Maybe the only truly new service in the web was selling bits of your self for free services? And I’m not sure that’s a win for individuals.
by anonbuddy | 2025-10-05 12:18:07+00:00
current data points are much more valuable than historical data points, so storing old data doesn't have much incentives

also by having ability to enable/disable access to your data, you have the power of who gets what and for which purpose

also reselling of your data should become illegal to start with, would you be OKAY if your lawyer sells your data? or your colorectal surgeon? off course not, we have laws in place for that, and same laws should be applied to whoever handles your personal data
by bluebarbet | 2025-10-05 12:18:23+00:00
Slightly offtopic, but the sheer scale of the phenomenon you allude to - of screen-addled zombification - is really turbo-charging my own misanthropy. People staggering around, necks hunched, eyes down, all but glued to their miserable little toys. Everywhere, everyone, all the time. It's just pathetic. I guess I had hoped humans would have more self-control than this.
by debugnik | 2025-10-05 12:18:42+00:00
I agree the shebangs are a blunt solution, but I'll give them polyglot for embedding arbitrary languages under the recipe syntax without having to shell out with a heredoc. It's a low bar, but I can't think of any alternative that clears it and I don't think there's any value in hosting the interpreter unless there's some particular API to expose to it.

Also, you wrote "Why not call out /usr/bin/env instead?" which is exactly what the example was doing, so I assumed your own proposal would have seemed sufficient to you, had you seen it.
by johannes1234321 | 2025-10-05 12:18:50+00:00
> But that “subject” header makes it paletable.

That's true for some forms of communication, but for social chitchat in an ongoing conversation there isn't much relevance.

Subject becomes especially ridiculous when Mail clients are localized and you get some "Re: AW: RE: Re: AW: fun stuff" as subject.

At work subject tis key. Allows me to ignore 90% of the mails immediately.
by nyaomaru | 2025-10-05 12:18:50+00:00
Hey everyone! I built this after years of copy pasting type guards across projects. The design tries to find a middle ground between runtime validation (like zod) and ergonomic type guards.

I'm especially curious if the “composability” part feels natural — e.g. combining guards with `and`, `or`, `struct`.

Also open to any feedback about naming and developer ergonomics!
by imtringued | 2025-10-05 12:19:01+00:00
One of the more disturbing things is that economists both believe in it and don't believe in it.

Like, the standard Arrow Debreu market assumes that you don't carry over money balances from one day to the next, yet economists will vehemently argue in favor of being able to violate Arrow Debreu markets, but the market is in equilibrium anyway.
by lapcat | 2025-10-05 12:20:23+00:00
> There are people that would get rich otherwise.

This is highly unlikely. Nobody has the magical ability to predict the outcome of sporting events.

> there are gangs influencing the outcomes of the sport events and selling the bets or organizing betting on them. Fraudster bosses, if they are smart, are absolutely getting rich.

This is highly unlikely for most of the things that Americans are gambling on, such as NFL games.

> But you didn't mean those.

It doesn't appear to be what the OP meant.
by mizzao | 2025-10-05 12:20:27+00:00
For everyone's context, I think this is about the process of enshittification:

1. Prioritize customers (product feels great)

2. Prioritize B2B (sellers in this case — customer experience starts to suffer)

3. Prioritize shareholders (customer experience is terrible, now sellers' experience starts to suffer too, product eventually dies — though it takes a while)
by tialaramex | 2025-10-05 12:20:51+00:00
Well, merely warning won't disable the feature. You could `forbid` these lints, and then require clippy for CI or something, the same way many people require unit tests pass in CI. I'd be very surprised if you find all three problematic. The problems you described feel like shadow_unrelated

You are absolutely right that anyhow doesn't do what you want for a no-alloc situation like a kernel driver or some ESP32 firmware - however it won't compile without an allocator, so, seems like you'd be shifting that problem hard left, the programmer who adds anyhow to their no allocator firmware can't build it.

Yes, I see now what Zig has here is literally a syntax check and so Rice doesn't apply because in Zig the function which returns an error is syntactically different and so Zig can say hey, this is an error function and those are different. I prefer the situation in Rust, but this is an important difference albeit one I don't agree with.
by eqvinox | 2025-10-05 12:21:19+00:00
> Wouldn't it be really nice if dmesg had more info about devices?

No, it wouldn't, that'd just make the kernel another 1.5MB larger. It's large enough as it is. And if there is a driver for the device, the driver will print more things anyway.

Remember you're dealing with low-level system interfacing here. You're expected to bring some knowledge.
by gcanyon | 2025-10-05 12:21:27+00:00
Both of these proposals (as far as I've read them, YMMV) fail the evolutionary test. At the scale we're talking about, ideas must proceed as evolution does: not with a far-away goal in mind, but with incremental changes, each of which individually must be an improvement over the status quo.

We are at (near) a significant local maximum, and (again, as far as I've read, which is not all of it for sure) the people pitching this form of information control have given no set of steps from here to there without significant cost/effort.

Of course they don't have to have the whole path in mind. By definition they just need the first step or two. But they must be steps up.

You don't get wings by wanting to fly; first you need feathers to keep warm (I am not an evolutionary biologist, I don't know if that's a valid theory).
by ffsm8 | 2025-10-05 12:22:22+00:00
It has?

Don't get me wrong, I'm in the tech industry and generally more online then likely 95% of the population, but ime ... Nobody even knows what bluesky is?

(They also don't know what X is, though they DO know what Twitter is)

And even more niche products like mostodon, the fediverse altogether etc are entirely unknown to most of the tech industry too.
by leobg | 2025-10-05 12:22:26+00:00
Of course. Because the unseen part here is that the model is being taught that every other representation of the same fact was wrong.

Meaning, during training, if the model expresses the same fact in some other form, maybe even with just one extra comma, that response will be marked just as wrong as a really wrong one.

In fact, the model may give an answer that’s better than the one in the training set - but it will still be punished for it and forced to change its weights because the answer doesn’t match token-for-token.

We don’t have a loss function for meaning. We only have one for token matching. Anyone who is serious about curating datasets for fine-tuning needs to take this into account.
by GrossPel | 2025-10-05 12:23:01+00:00
This is a true hurt! I was wondering when someone would do something about it. Its like what superhuman did to email but in Slack.

I boarded in under a minute and I saw the value that instant. It clarified the exact things I need to do right now.

Hope to see next, auto-responds in my style of messaging or even a smart search-box.
by crazygringo | 2025-10-05 12:23:09+00:00
> current data points are much more valuable than historical data points, so storing old data doesn't have much incentives

Not true -- advertising profiles are vastly more valuable when based on a lifetime of data.

> also by having ability to enable/disable access to your data, you have the power of who gets what

But realistically, when are you ever going to disable access? If you want people to be able to read your replies no matter what social network they're using, you're going to make those replies available to every social network.

> and for which purpose also reselling of your data should become illegal to start with

This is my point. The solution here is legal, not technological. Personal data storage doesn't change anything legally, and changing the law would prevent reselling even if you didn't have personal data storage.

It seems important not to confuse the two, in order not to give people false hopes.
by Findecanor | 2025-10-05 12:24:18+00:00
That discussion is five years old and a lot has happened in the RISC-V world since.

64-bit RISC-V finally achieved feature-parity with 64-bit ARM, with the RVA22 and RVA23 profiles. (There are no RVA23-compliant chips taped out yet, but several are expected early next year)

RISC-V's core was intentionally made small, to be useful for teaching and for allowing very tiny cores to be made for embedded systems. The extensibility has resulted in a few trade-offs that are different from ARM and can definitely be discussed, but the extensibility is also one of the RISC-V ecosystem's strengths: Embedded chips can contain just the extensions that are needed. Proprietary extensions are also allowed, which have been used to prototype and evaluate them when developing official extensions.

For any fair comparison between ARM and RISC-V, you should compare the right ARM ISA against the right RISC-V ISA. ARM Cortex-M0 against RV32IC, ARMv9 AArch64 against RVA23, etc.
by eastbound | 2025-10-05 12:24:52+00:00
Ok, so your goal is not to share the governance of a country together?

With your proposal, I make concessions (which, by all means, is the concession that I stop arguing, so that’s a general concession on the idea of negotiating together entirely), while you don’t make concessions, and then we don’t govern the country together, is it correct?

Sounds like extremism to me. Either you get the power, either we do, but it’s a struggle of power if you do not engage in listening.

The goal is discussion is that you will discover points on which you can compromise without hurting your values, and we do as well, until we deal together. But it seems Americans have lost that. Which is mirrored by the line of your party: “Don’t engage with the other party. No concession.”

It is one-sided. The discussion has always been open on the right, but people moved to the right because the discussion was closed on the left.
by zelphirkalt | 2025-10-05 12:24:55+00:00
To be honest, I don't think that this strictly meets the criteria of FP, but there is nothing wrong with that. I myself often use a Scheme dialect, which also allows you to do mutation and side-effects all day long. But what I do is to put that stuff into a thin layer that is around the functional core of the code, so that the core logic is not affected by the procedural/imperative parts. It is not 100% functional (and can't be), but it is practical and reaps most of the benefits of FP, except for that very thin layer that does some input and output. I am not trying to down-talk Elixir or Erlang here. Both are great languages.

That said, I wouldn't call this approach "imperative but functional". I would rather say functional core and thin imperative/procedural outer layer. Similar response to the sibling comment. And considering this, I still see functional and imperative at odds.

But this is merely a difference in terminology, not in practice and how we solve problems.
by Nullabillity | 2025-10-05 12:25:45+00:00
> I really can't think of anything that comes close in terms of [...] developer experience.

Of all the languages that I have to touch professionally, C# feels by far the most opaque and unusable.

Documentation tends to be somewhere between nonexistant and useless, and MSDN's navigation feels like it was designed by a sadist. (My gold standard would be Rustdoc or Scala 2.13 era Scaladoc, but even Javadoc has been.. fine for basically forever.) For third-party libraries it tends to be even more dire and inconsistent.

The Roslyn language server crashes all the time, and when it does work.. it doesn't do anything useful? Like cross-project "go-to-definition" takes me to either a list of members or a decompiled listing of source code, even when I have the actual source code right there! (I know there's this thing called "SourceLink" which is.. supposed to solve this? I think? But I've never seen it actually use it in practice.)

Even finding where something comes from is ~impossible without the language server, because `using` statements don't mention.. what they're even importing. (Assuming that you have them at all. Because this is also the company that thought project-scoped imports were a good idea!)

And then there's the dependency injection, where I guess someone thought it would be cute if every library just had an opaque extension method on the god object, that didn't tell you anything about what it actually did. So good luck finding where the actual implementation of anything is.
by anonbuddy | 2025-10-05 12:25:59+00:00
ideally you should be able in a simple way to host your stuff, in this case in a POD. That service should be provided by a utility company, same way we have internet providers now. They will be well regulated and it would be in their interest to safely hold your data because if not, they would face legal and financial consequences.

All other services would read/write from your Pod.
by dvfjsdhgfv | 2025-10-05 12:26:09+00:00
This is a very intriguing statement because it looks like it contains a truism but something is off. Yes, everything is a derivative work of some kind, what matters is the amount of added value - if it gets close to 0 as in this case, we've got bare plagiarism.

[As a side note, the problem with LLMs (sorry, the term "AI" became so muddy I prefer not to use it) is that they tend to be extremely uncreative and just average to mean. So I wouldn't expect added value in creativity itself, just helping humans with more menial tasks just like antirez is doing.]
by tmcb | 2025-10-05 12:26:48+00:00
Of course not. To me, HN’s content is pretty similar what pop tech websites had 20-30 years ago.

One valid question, though, is whether or not you should add more pop tech content to your information diet. That, of course, is up to you. What makes HN such a good information source are experts actively looking for knowledge and being kind enough to share their findings here. That is something else you should consider—not the sharing part, but actively looking for it. You will consume objectively less “data”, but it will be much more meaningful.
by CodesInChaos | 2025-10-05 12:26:58+00:00
I'd expect negative integer ids in an API to break even more integrations than unexpectedly large integers.

Though I guess that likelyhood is influenced by the choice of protocol. For example when using protobuf the client code generated from the specification file will use a 32-bit integer, if that's how it was defined. While in JSON I'd generally assume it's a positive integer smaller than 2^53.
by timschmidt | 2025-10-05 12:27:38+00:00
Strong disagree. Best practice is to evaluate the likelihood of scenarios along with potential negative impacts and your contrived scenario fails on both counts. It would not survive review. If you are lucky, your senior engineer may consider it a joke. Unlucky and you might be the joke for suggesting it. Either way you'd be liable for such a decision, were it to make it into a production vehicle and result in a death.

Which is why many engineers wear the ring.

Folks do love to argue though.
by atombender | 2025-10-05 12:30:53+00:00
I taught myself Turbo Pascal on a friend's IBM PS/2 P75 [1] around 1990, also a briefcase-style luggable that came out a couple of years after this one.

The P75 had a delightful orange plasma screen, and the keyboard was wired and could be unhooked from the case, and since it was a 486 chip, it could all of DOS, OS/2, and Windows (and apparently it was able to run Windows 95 when that came out).

My main machine at the time was the Amiga 500, and the PS/2 felt like a step down in terms of graphics and so on, but Turbo Pascal was just too magical for me to care.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_PS/2_portable_computers
by johannes1234321 | 2025-10-05 12:30:54+00:00
> That’s the case of any protocol

Well, E-Mail is inherently async and allows a sequence of relays with no back channel to confirm delivery.

With other protocols (except snail mail) I get a confirmation that recipient was valid and the message for delivered. With some I even get a marker it was read.

With e-mail, with luck, I get a cryptic not standardized response mail, if something went wrong. Sometimes even only a lot later as delivery is retried for a few days in some cases.
by bgwalter | 2025-10-05 12:31:18+00:00
Newell Brands stock price fell sharply during the first Trump administration from $53 and is now at $5.40.

Marketing this as a success story of U.S. manufacturing is insane. If the WSJ honestly thinks the outlook is better now, it should at least provide the history and say why (and who provided the investments for automation given that Trump is a sharpie user).
by bluebarbet | 2025-10-05 12:31:23+00:00
That's a fair argument. It's also unfalsifiable and based on an underlying personal worldview. Specifically (I would venture) an "us and them" view of things where history is determined by groups and power - a left-wing outlook, basically! I'm a bit of a liberal individualist by nature, I see personal responsibility and autonomy as a thing. I'm not sure how I'd go about deprogramming myself of this even if I wanted to. But it would help with the misanthropy, for sure.
by mananaysiempre | 2025-10-05 12:31:36+00:00
I’m having trouble figuring out from the body of the article what the way mentioned in its title actually was.

There’s a list of nice business steps the company took (and I can’t imagine starting work on the problem in 2018 hurt either), but I don’t expect they were the only ones to take any specific one, so why did Sharpie in particular succeed? What’s the recipe? Automate the crap out of your assembly line and promote (a lucky few among) your former assembly-line workers (who you definitely did not fire when you got high on automation) to technicians? I can’t imagine that’s a rare thought; yet this seems to be a rare success story.
by southernplaces7 | 2025-10-05 12:33:23+00:00
For what it's worth as one bit of advice: Try to make the best of what you can do in those long deep night hours. If you can't use them for sleep, as a deep night owl, then make them count for something else that's useful. Many of history's most interesting, famous and also infamous characters (and overall very productive people by sheer virtue of their achievements) were extreme night owls. It didn't stop them from creating and working. For certain types of endeavor or work in particular, the part of the day in which the hours are put in isn't nearly so relevant as the hours simply being used in the first place.

Just a few observations from one night owl to another; I can rarely go to sleep before 4 am.
by Jowsey | 2025-10-05 12:35:53+00:00
Related, it feels like AI Studio is the only mainstream LLM frontend that treats you like an adult. Choose your own safety boundaries, modify the context & system prompt as you please, clear rate limits and pricing, etc. It's something you come to appreciate a lot, even if we are in the part of the cycle where Google's models aren't particularly SOTA rn
by bonoboTP | 2025-10-05 12:36:07+00:00
If you like Matrix, Memento, Truman Show, Black Mirror (San Junipero, Bandersnatch), Inception, Interstellar, 12 Monkeys etc. you may also like it. These are not necessarily thematically aligned but based on vibes they cluster near it for me.

I definitely enjoyed it many years ago as a younger person.
by Living_image | 2025-10-05 12:36:18+00:00
Location: Ibadan Nigeria Remote: yes Willing to relocate: No Technologies: virtual assistant Cv:https://docs.google.com/document/d/17tahxHWZgXJoLVKhI4i_QKOO... Email: elishajesutimileyin@gmail.com

I am a professional communicator with over three years of experience as a virtual assistant, facilitating effective communication between clients and organizations. My role involves ensuring successful agreements and providing immediate solutions and valuable contributions. Also a computer literate..
by theasisa | 2025-10-05 12:36:31+00:00
> Rather than having flow and concentration interrupted by incoming message notifications, with email I can easily decide when to fetch and process messages.

But emails also notify and therefore interrupt. If you want to turn notifications off in your email or only poll new mails when you choose you can also mute notifications (or turn on dnd) or close the chat app.

Email sucks for chat like communication. It is great for long detailed messages. Having both is the best of both worlds.

I have work email and personal email. I have work chat (Slack) and personal chat (WhatsApp with friends, Keybase with my partner). Choosing which chat app is also a great tool for making sure I am dealing with the right audience. I don't want to accidentally message my boss about stuff I send to my partner.
by tietjens | 2025-10-05 12:37:16+00:00
Enjoyed this. Lots of large homelabs like this are built in order to stream video or local llm models and that usually leaves me feeling a bit left out because I have been building my own, but have no interest in either of those things.

Some services I am interested in are hosting my own RSS feed reader, an ebook library, and a password manager. But I'm always looking for more if there are any suggestions.
by gcanyon | 2025-10-05 12:37:39+00:00
Yeah, this was my immediate thought as well, but if the spec for the API says signed int, then at least you're defensible: you haven't broken the letter of the spec, even if you're pounding on the spirit of the spec pretty hard. You have a fairly reasonable likelihood that most/all of your customers have implemented to your spec, and therefore any negative consequences are down to secondary effects of how they handle the negative values, not directly because of failure to be able to store them.

That said, to your point, there was almost certainly someone comparing IDs to determine recency, and during the transition from large-positive to large-negative, that would absolutely cause havoc.

I'd be curious if their API spec actually said anywhere that the IDs increased consistently.