MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by bloppe | 2025-10-08 14:21:46+00:00
At Google, you can just run "buildifier" to auto-generate the build files from the source code import statements, so clearly the build files are redundant. That's not the point. Bazel is supposed to be fast, and keeping the analysis graph loaded in memory is part of that. I always thought of the build files as a sort of cache. It would usually take a few seconds for buildifier to "revalidate" that cache, which can be done infrequently, then the actual build itself, which happens much more frequently while iterating, is faster. You really start to notice the performance difference in larger repos.
by whimsicalism | 2025-10-08 14:21:49+00:00
Dismissing out of hand because it's from China is ridiculous but speaks to the jingoistic times we are living in, particularly when this is a Denisovan skull.

Legitimately saddens me to see such a low-info reply at the top. Highly recommend people read "who we are and how we got here" - it provides a lot of great context to discoveries like this.
by charles_f | 2025-10-08 14:21:55+00:00
I think it's one of these "reading the letter of the law" instances. European laws (or rather, laws in European countries) often mandate public sector to use open source. The reasons vary, some of them are about promoting interoperability, and avoiding vendor lock-in, digital sovereignty, and the EU commission has a principle of "public money = public code".

So using open source on someone else's computer technically fulfills that requirement, without completing some of the reasons why the requirement exist (vendor lock-in in this particular instance is particularly laughable).
by ckemere | 2025-10-08 14:21:55+00:00
In the case of the active conflicts (Gaza, Ukraine), it seems that there is a strong disconnect between internal-facing media and political will and external facing media on potential allies.

I would have liked some more unpacking of how this disconnect would have been interpreted by Clausewitz.

It also struck me that as an outsider to these conflicts, I assume that the combatants are acting rationally from the perspective of the adage (“No one starts a war—or rather, no one in his senses ought to do so—without first being clear in his mind what he intends to achieve by that war and how he intends to conduct it“) and I judge the morality based on the inferred intent. That would also have been interesting to unpack…
by falcor84 | 2025-10-08 14:22:37+00:00
What do you mean it depends? What does it depend on?

I was hoping that being "the chair of urban warfare studies at the Modern War Institute" [0], the author could offer some actual advice on strategy. Or what is the institute for? Hopefully not just for writing essays.

As for Israel's strategy towards tunnels, I actually have no understanding of what's going on there, but I can just say that whatever they're doing has not been effective in achieving a decisive victory, and is thus ipso facto not a good strategy. So I'm wondering what might a good strategy have been. The author now has two years of hindsight - could he not use that time and information to offer some alternative approach?

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Spencer_(military_officer...
by neomantra | 2025-10-08 14:23:09+00:00
I've been happy with Databento as a low-friction way to get market data. I liked it so much, I ported their structs and APIs to Golang. [1]

Their EQUS Mini dataset is a great way to dip the toe if you want live data without licensing restrictions. Databento's article talks exactly about how it is sourced, but it is not that it is averaged but anonymized, specifically because of the complexities of upstream exchange licensing. [2]

You don't have to pay $200 per month for that -- that's for all-you-can-eat. You can experiment with pay as you go.

You can use my dbn-go tools to help you... here's the cost to get all the 1-day candlesticks for all the US Equity Symbols for 1-year... which you could use to make all sorts of charts and redistribute them freely (the trickiest part honestly):

$ dbn-go-hist cost --dataset EQUS.SUMMARY -t 2024-07-01 -e 2025-07-01 -s ohlcv-1d ALL_SYMBOLS EQUS.SUMMARY ohlcv-1d $ 4.380178 156772672 bytes 2799512 records $ dbn-go-hist cost --dataset XNAS.ITCH -t 2024-07-01 -e 2025-07-01 -s ohlcv-1d ALL_SYMBOLS XNAS.ITCH ohlcv-1d $ 3.784698 135459632 bytes 2418922 records

So $4.38 for all that data or $3.78 for just the NASDAQ exchange (not sure of redistribution of that one).

I hang out on their Slack. Today there was a deep discussion about optimizing C++ SPSC queues, although it is usually isn't too technical like that. They are pretty transparent about how they implement things.

[1] https://github.com/NimbleMarkets/dbn-go

[2] https://databento.com/blog/databento-us-equities-mini-now-av...
by bartread | 2025-10-08 14:23:57+00:00
The other problem is the perennial, how much of what we do actually has value?

Churning out 5x (or whatever - I’m deliberately being a bit hyperbolic) as much code sounds great on the face of it but what does it matter if little to none of it is actually valuable?

You correctly identify that software development is often driven by fashion and emotion but the much much bigger problem is that product and portfolio management is driven by fashion and emotion. How much stuff is built based on the whims of CEOs or other senior stakeholders without any real evidence to back it up?

I suppose the big advantage of being more “productive” is that you can churn through more wrong ideas more quickly and thus perhaps improve your chances of stumbling across something that is valuable.

But, of course, as I’ve just said: if that’s to work it’s absolutely predicated on real (and very substantial) productivity gains.

Perhaps I’m thinking about this wrong though: it’s not about production where standards, and the need to be vigilant, are naturally high, but really the gains should be seen mostly in terms of prototyping and validating multiple/many solutions and ideas.
by mihaaly | 2025-10-08 14:24:38+00:00
I also believe that this peek into the mentality of the organization leadership makes doubt in customers if the organization can be trusted again. I, personally, will think more than twice before choosing them again. This will be several years of recovery for the reputation, if it ever happens at all. Synology is in the box called 'squeezing cutomers for money' and the customer has no incentive to spend any time or money to test if the classification is still valid. Will stay there, despite this step. There is doubt that they changed their way of thinking. They only reacted to the repercussion to THIS specific action of theirs, that became measurably very bad for THEM. It was not like they revised their action after the outcry, no. They had to bleed, they want to stop THEIR bleeding, not making it good again for the customer. benefit for the remaining customers is just a coincidence here. I am not hopeful for their change of mentality. Which could be something disappointing to hear for faithful employees.
by mamonster | 2025-10-08 14:24:49+00:00
>if I could go back in time and paint them a picture of how the situation is today, they'd jump out the window

Debatable. The war itself is basically a massively failure, but it completely stabilized the regime. Whereas 5 years ago there were clear questions about what would happen after Putin died, ZOV-logic is enough to power the regime for the next 10 years.

20 years of careful building of liberal oppositions by highlighting corruption is now out of the window. FBK, Kats, Volkov, etc are now all abroad with no chance to return; literally no one gives a fuck about corruption that's not military related. The new "liberal" party that replaced Navalniy & Co (Noviye Lyudi) is basically only liberal in economics.

The only thing that will decide if Russia ends up winning or losing in the long term is whether the "Pivot to Asia" strategy that they basically were forced to take will end up working.
by MontyCarloHall | 2025-10-08 14:26:10+00:00
I agree it's not written in the clearest way, nor verifiable (though Stefano Marinelli does seem to be a semi-public figure in the online IT community, so it's not some anonymous blog).

>So we have just learned in paragraph 1 that the current system is dated and full of security holes and missing features. In paragraph 2 we have learned that the current system's infrastructure is "solid" and "working fine".

This confused me too, until I realized that he probably meant that his company set up the hardware infrastructure ("reputable IP classes, redundant datacenters"), but doesn't manage the software. Otherwise, why shred your own credibility from the first sentence by crapping on the "ancient," "insecure," and "ineffective" Exchange server?

>How can the price be both "reasonable" and "absurd?"

Agreed, this part makes no sense.
by draga79 | 2025-10-08 14:26:27+00:00
Updating Exchange would have meant spending a lot on new licenses to upgrade to a new release, and public administrations were encouraged to seek open-source solutions. The underlying server infrastructure was solid, but the VM with Exchange was now old. The entire setup would have needed to be redone. The second paragraph, on the other hand, says that the quote was "acceptable" for them, knowing the average costs for that service. But it was also very high, even in the opinion of the IT manager.

This isn't AI slop. These are real-life experiences. The goal is to raise awareness that open source doesn't always and necessarily mean freedom: lock-in exists.
by SAI_Peregrinus | 2025-10-08 14:26:43+00:00
Userspace-accessible GPIOs, I2C, SPI, PCM, and UART on a system that runs Linux. My employer uses them for a bunch of our hardware-in-the-loop test automation, with the GPIOs used for CAN, relays for switching various signals, vibration table control, etc. The USB gets used for SCPI device control (power supply, multimeter, etc.) and DuT connection. It's a lot cheaper to use a Pi for this than it is to use a small form factor x86 machine with a bunch of USB-<protocol> dongles.
by iamnothere | 2025-10-08 14:26:49+00:00
I think the lesson is that you can never be sure that you will meet your military objectives—failure is always a possibility—and the blowback from that failure will be more limited if you appear to have conducted your war with adequate respect for noncombatants.

Failing to conquer a nation (or depose its government, or secure some land, or defend a border, or whatever your objective is) may be shrugged off by your own nation, and you may even be able to normalize relations after some time. But if you abuse the noncombatant population, you often create bitter enemies, generational hatred, and global pressures on your society from third party observers. In the worst case this eventually escalates to mutual threats of genocide and total war.

Even if a nation wins a conflict through sheer brutality, they may lose the occupation, or the reconstruction, or good relations with important partners, or all of the above. And they may create an enemy who will one day return with a vengeance.
by robjellinghaus | 2025-10-08 14:27:29+00:00
In my experience with Claude Code and Sonnet, it is absolutely possible to have architectural and design-oriented conversations about the work, at an entirely different and higher level than using a (formerly) high-level programming language. I have been able to learn new systems and frameworks far faster with Claude than with any previous system I have used. It definitely does require close attention to detect mistakes it does not realize it is making, but that is where the skill comes in. I find it being right 80% of the time and wrong 20% of the time to be a hugely acceptable tradeoff, when it allows me to go radically faster because it can do that 80% much quicker than I could. Especially when it comes to learning new code bases and exploring new repos I have cloned -- it can read code superhumanly quickly and explain it to me in depth.

It is certainly a hugely different style of interaction, but it helps to think of it as a conversation, or more precisely, a series of individual small targeted specific conversations, each aimed at researching a specific issue or solving a specific problem.
by lm28469 | 2025-10-08 14:27:42+00:00
The numbers don't lie though, statistically nobody wants VR, we haven't even reached the numbers they were predicating for 2016, 10 years later ...

> It says 96 million VR headsets will be shipped in 2020

https://www.forbes.com/sites/paullamkin/2016/02/17/wearable-...

Turns out they sold half as much.... in 5 years: https://startupsmagazine.co.uk/article-over-51-million-vr-he...

> the VR/AR market will reach $182 billion in revenue, including hardware and software/content, by 2025 and bypass television.

https://www.startbeyond.co/media/idcvrrevenuereport

Meanwhile: "The global virtual reality (VR) market size was valued at $16.32 billion in 2024"

I don't know anyone with a social life who care about these toys, the only people I know of who are semi interested already spend 6+ hours a day gaming.
by ceejayoz | 2025-10-08 14:28:05+00:00
Maybe you got a bit lucky.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_Texas_power_crisis#Backgr...

> In 2011, Texas was hit by the Groundhog Day blizzard between February 1 and 5, resulting in rolling blackouts across more than 75% of the state… Following this disaster, the North American Electric Reliability Corporation made several recommendations for upgrading Texas's electrical infrastructure to prevent a similar event occurring in the future, but these recommendations were ignored due to the cost of winterizing the systems.

> Unlike other power interconnections, Texas does not require a reserve margin of power capacity beyond what is expected. A 2019 North American Electric Reliability Corporation report found that ERCOT had a low anticipated reserve margin of generation capacity and was the only part of the country without sufficient resources available to meet projected peak summer electricity demand.
Show HN: Recall: Give Claude memory with Redis-backed persistent context
by elfenleid | 2025-10-08 14:28:06+00:00
Hey HN! I'm José, and I built Recall to solve a problem that was driving me crazy.

The Problem: I use Claude for coding daily, but every conversation starts from scratch. I'd explain my architecture, coding standards, past decisions... then hit the context limit and lose everything. Next session? Start over.

The Solution: Recall is an MCP (Model Context Protocol) server that gives Claude persistent memory using Redis + semantic search. Think of it as long-term memory that survives context limits and session restarts.

How it works: - Claude stores important context as "memories" during conversations - Memories are embedded (OpenAI) and stored in Redis with metadata - Semantic search retrieves relevant memories automatically - Works across sessions, projects, even machines (if you use cloud Redis)

Key Features: - Global memories: Share context across all projects - Relationships: Link related memories into knowledge graphs - Versioning: Track how memories evolve over time - Templates: Reusable patterns for common workflows - Workspace isolation: Project A memories don't pollute Project B

Tech Stack: - TypeScript + MCP SDK - Redis for storage - OpenAI embeddings (text-embedding-3-small) - ~189KB bundle, runs locally

Current Stats: - 27 tools exposed to Claude - 10 context types (directives, decisions, patterns, etc.) - Sub-second semantic search on 10k+ memories - Works with Claude Desktop, Claude Code, any MCP client

Example Use Case: I'm building an e-commerce platform. I told Claude once: "We use Tailwind, prefer composition API, API rate limit is 1000/min." Now every conversation, Claude remembers and applies these preferences automatically.

What's Next (v1.6.0 in progress): - CI/CD pipeline with GitHub Actions - Docker support for easy deployment - Proper test suite with Vitest - Better error messages and logging

Try it:

npm install -g @joseairosa/recall # Add to claude_desktop_config.json # Start using persistent memory
by acron0 | 2025-10-08 14:28:57+00:00
Without meaning to sound flippant or dismissive, I think you're overthinking it. By the sounds of it, agents aren't offering what you say you need. What are _are_ offering is the boilerplate, the research, the planning etc. All the stuff that's ancillary. You could quite fairly say that it's in the pursuit of this stuff where details and ideas emerge and I would agree, but sometimes you don't need ideas. You need solutions which are run-of-the-mill and boring.
by falcor84 | 2025-10-08 14:28:58+00:00
Well said. But I'm still left with the question - have we actually benefitted in any way from these two centuries of military theory? If anything, it seems to me that wars are less decisive, more prolonged and often more deadly than they've been in Clausewitz's time.

If we treat kinetic warfare as a game, I suppose you could argue that as in any other game, the more knowledgeable and more experienced the players are, the higher the likelihood of a draw. But then, seeing the harm that this is doing to the world, should we not see about changing the rules of war to reduce this likelihood and make things more decisive again, with the aim of reducing overall harm to civilians?
by jklinger410 | 2025-10-08 14:29:08+00:00
Open Pilot (https://comma.ai/openpilot) connects to your cars brain and sends acceleration, turning, etc signals to drive the car for you.

Both Open Pilot and Tesla FSD use regular cameras (ie. eyes) to try and understand the environment just as a human would. That is where my analogy is coming from.

I could say the same about using a humanoid robot to log on to your computer and open chrome. My point is also that we made no changes to the road network to enable FSD.
by rhetocj23 | 2025-10-08 14:29:32+00:00
"I suppose the big advantage of being more “productive” is that you can churn through more wrong ideas more quickly and thus perhaps improve your chances of stumbling across something that is valuable."

But I think there is a very big danger here - you build in the action but completely neglect the deep thinking behind a vision, strategy etc.

So yes you produce more stuff. But that stuff means more money spent - which is generally a sunk cost too.

In a bizarre way, I predict we will see the failure rate of software firms rise. Despite the fact these 'productivity' tools exist.
by sabenamantle | 2025-10-08 14:30:16+00:00
Hi HN, I’m part of the team behind Mantle, and we just launched Mantle Starter, a truly free plan for cap table management tailored for early-stage founders.

Here’s the problem we saw:

Tools get expensive or restrictive just when you’re doing your first rounds.

Founders often manage their cap tables in spreadsheets (painful, error-prone).

If you want to experiment with equity, model dilution, issue options, you end up doing awkward manual math.

So we built Mantle Starter.

What it includes (for free): - Record and track securities (SAFEs, Warrants, Options, Shares, etc.) - Automatic dilution modeling for new rounds - Unlimited stakeholder accounts (no extra seats cost) - Data export anytime as a spreadsheet

You can create a free account here: https://equity.withmantle.com/signup
by glitchc | 2025-10-08 14:30:27+00:00
So who will pay for universal healthcare? And if we spend on universal healthcare, what do we give up in return? If we don't exploit resources and capacities, we have less money to go around. Standards of living suffer, mostly affecting the very same people who want free healthcare.

People who want universal healthcare exercise magic money thinking, even though others keep trying to explain that there's no free lunch. It's always other people or other sources who should bear the burden because they cannot afford healthcare for their loved ones. It's obvious why others don't want to pay to everyone else.

Being banned from Twitter is not oppression, but canceling a late night TV show is. You may want to pull your skirt down, your hypocrisy is showing.
by TechSquidTV | 2025-10-08 14:30:37+00:00
While we are on this subject, has anyone found good DIY solutions for similar hardware? I haven't looked recently, but I have always struggled to be able to put together anything that would be remotely similar in size to a small 4-bay NAS.

My "NAS" is a 4U short network racked unit. Pretty large by comparison, but its also mostly empty space.
by paddleon | 2025-10-08 14:30:41+00:00
Friend, I have respect to where you are coming from, and ask you to please think a little longer term.

You don't prioritize the well-being of the other side, but you do want to avoid radicalizing them. The more reasons they have to surrender, the more likely they are to surrender, thus ending the conflict sooner AND keeping the end conditions one they are comfortable living under.

If instead they feel they are in a fight to the death, then you have a much tougher battle on your hand because they will fight to the death. You'll still win (maybe) but it's going to cost you in personelle and time and money.

Next aspect. Moral of your troops. Everyone wants to be a hero, very few people join the military because they want to kill. And those that are in it to kill tend to be toxic leaders which is really bad for the rest of the team.

"Rules of war"/"rules of engagement" are methods that allow your troops to maintain their humanity and sense of purpose under horrific situations. You give up that and you are now undercutting the fighting power of your own forces.

The military did not come up with these ideas to make themselves weak. They came up with them and enforced them because they are the source of strength.
by gh02t | 2025-10-08 14:30:49+00:00
In my mind app support is the main reason to pick Synology. They may not always be as capable as the best self hostable and/or commercial alternatives, but they are easy for people with intermediate skills to set up and maintain. That makes them a good deal for prosumer homes and SMBs without a dedicated IT guy. And with the way the Synology apps are designed you're then somewhat locked in.

You can get basic network storage more or less anywhere, for much cheaper, so in my mind apps and the polished GUI + integration are the only reason you would even consider Synology unless you're already locked in. Maybe technical support contracts at the higher end, but you can get that, done better, from other vendors too.
by tsimionescu | 2025-10-08 14:31:51+00:00
Only in economic terms. Sure, China would face a massive shortfall and would have huge unemployment if it suddenly stopped exporting to the USA. But that's not the same world of trouble as suddenly being unable to get important technology and parts, which is what the US would face. And China is really not reliant on imports from the USA - especially not in time of war (that is, they might have a problem selling things legally without paying various royalties to US companies - but that doesn't matter anymore in a world War).