MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by viraptor | 2025-10-12 12:05:02+00:00
> They also ask for height, weight, hair/eye color, and race.

If you want to identify someone like that, you're after whether they have male/female/androgynous looks, not their sex. Otherwise it's just a convenient shortcut that works most of the time.

> identify your dead body, it would be critical to know your sex

Fresh? Again, you're likely interested in male/female presenting. Sex assigned at birth can also be confusing here. It's really not simple for some people.

> stipulate that you must actually be the biological sex that you register with

"Biological sex" isn't a well defined thing. You'd have to start from what does it even mean. The ratio that doesn't fit in either category may be tiny, but country-wide it still covers millions of people.
by Telemakhos | 2025-10-12 12:06:05+00:00
I wouldn't hasten to blame outsourcing on one political party or the other. Those of us old enough to remember Ross Perot and his "giant sucking sound" (his projection that free trade agreements under consideration in the early 1990s would lead to outsourcing and negative outcomes for the American economy) also remember that he was a third-party candidate. Both of the big parties and their candidates (Bush and Clinton back then) supported philosophies of trade that would (and in retrospect did) lead to outsourcing. Until Trump, neither party was willing to commit political capital towards questioning the free trade orthodoxy in any meaningful way, and it was free trade that lowered barriers to outsourcing.
by Neywiny | 2025-10-12 12:06:06+00:00
Hmmm so you're ignoring the crux of my argument because it's convenient for you (h264 is comfortably small, AV1 is maybe too big, so between them might work). So anything that's related to why AV1 won't fit is pointless. They know that and are improving on it.

Your argument about your large amount of flops is odd. You would only store data that way if you needed everything on the same cycle. You say there's a multiplexor after that. Data storage + multiplexor is just memory. Could use a bram or lutram which would cut down on that dramatically, big if there's a need based on later processing which you haven't defined. And even then, that's for AV1 which isn't AV2 and may change
by resoluteteeth | 2025-10-12 12:06:35+00:00
If you read the actual link I don't think they're saying that using it as a covid test with some specific threshold of microclots has a 94% accuracy but just that the raw microclot count has a 94% accuracy.

The title on hn which implies that seems to be inaccurate and it's not the original title of the article.
by aeon_ai | 2025-10-12 12:07:21+00:00
Which capital is most advantageous in any specific situation is dependent on context.

We could probably debate how holding onto piles of green paper doesn’t provide much advantage in certain contexts, but I suspect you’d agree with that.

My proposal is that there’s a high likelihood the bet is that green paper matters less than high powered AI systems, and as far as I can tell, that’s a reasonable bet.
by tgsovlerkhgsel | 2025-10-12 12:07:59+00:00
The paper claims that 1/5 of people experience Long COVID after an infection. Given that approximately everyone has caught COVID by now, this does not track with how rarely I've heard of people with it.

Wikipedia lists much lower numbers on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_COVID (6–7% in adults, ~1% in children, less after vaccination.) and seems to use a more liberal definition than this paper, as it mentions "Most people with symptoms at 4 weeks recover by 12 weeks" (while the paper only considers it "long COIVD" if symptoms last past 3 months).

I've found studies (peer reviewed, as far as I can tell) claiming anything from well under 10% to well over 30%.

What's going on here?
by braiamp | 2025-10-12 12:08:37+00:00
Wikipedia is not meant to appear neutral, it's meant to "mirror the current consensus of mainstream scholarship [... aka] 'accepted knowledge'". Basically, if the accepted knowledge of an event is that it is not a genocide, Wikipedia has to reflect _that_. Wikipedia is not a soapbox. It doesn't have an stance. It just copies and transmit as accurately as possible, the current understanding from qualified sources. You can literally see it in the "balance" section of this article.
by numpad0 | 2025-10-12 12:09:06+00:00
The official reasoning is that the spec documents and certification testing aren't good enough, and each cellular cores has each its own quirks, interpretations, parameters, and they don't know if the phone is compatible with each networks unless Carrier Acceptance/Inter-Operability Test is done at carrier certified tests.

So why not actually perfect the spec and cut those uncertainties and costs...? idk.
by maxglute | 2025-10-12 12:09:40+00:00
High temperature magnets for motors (controlling flight surfaces), radar, sonar, lasers. TLDR miniturization, increase power draw. Might have to reduce range due to heaver components, or keep range by deliver smaller payloads, all while sensing less because you can't power emitters as hard, i.e. now you're using more ordnance to attack/defend. But main issue is if you can't smuggle, designing around is expensive / long process and all of a sudden your inventory has 2 supply chains for new / legacy fleet.
by mrkeen | 2025-10-12 12:09:46+00:00
The beautiful and essential technique of DI (dependency inversion) got namesquatted hard by DI (dependency injection).

Before, you used to write "loosely coupled" software by decoupling your business logic from your IO to keep it testable. You could take virtually anything worth testing, 'new' it in a unit test, and bob's your uncle.

Now you write "loosely coupled" software by keeping the coupling between components, but also couple them to a bunch of Spring dependencies too (check your imports!). Now you can't instantiate anything without Spring.
by CamperBob2 | 2025-10-12 12:10:41+00:00
How is that point relevant? The ELIZA effect involves humans incorrectly attributing a simple computer program with intelligence. Meanwhile, a complex ML model that solves difficult problems it hasn't seen before is intelligent, whether you or I like it or not.

That part is no longer up for debate. The question is how useful and scalable this particular form of intelligence will turn out to be.
by raw_anon_1111 | 2025-10-12 12:11:42+00:00
So again you deflect instead admitting you were wrong (again). I give you the same challenge. With just content blocking, show me a site that 1Blocker doesn’t block ads for. Or the even easier challenge tell me functionality that you have that can’t be duplicated on iOS.

Since you don’t want to do that, find a citation where 1blocker doesn’t block ads for a specific site and I will try it myself and post screenshots like I did before.

You brought up a concern about privacy, the content browsing framework protects your privacy.

You completely moved the goal post, now you’re saying that I had to pay $15 11 years ago.

Oh and the link you posted had this comment.

> In my experience 1Blocker is stable, fast, blocks all advertisings and makes my Youtube experience in Safari more fun because there is no advertisings in YouTube. There is a community here talking about r/1Blocker for any kind of question.
by fragmede | 2025-10-12 12:11:53+00:00
> Throwing new prompts at a machine with built-in randomness to see if one sticks is DEFINITELY not engineering.

Where does all the knowledge, laws of physics, and rules learned over many years to predictably design and build things come from, if not by throwing things at the wall and looking at what sticks and what does not, and then building a model based on the differences between what stuck and what did not, and then deriving a theory of stickiness and building up a set of rules on how things work?

"Remember kids, the only difference between screwing around and science is writing it down." -Adam Savage
by Towaway69 | 2025-10-12 12:12:25+00:00
The financial system has become a giant game of Monopoly, but unlike Monopoly, when all the capital has accumulated with one player, this financial system isn't restarted and the wealth redistributed.

Instead it feels like playing Monopoly, round for round, and all the money goes to the one player with all the hotels and train stations and there is no opportunity for other players to obtain any property or wealth.

If you are lucky enough to be in the circle of that one player with all the wealth, good for you. For the rest of us, it's just rolling the dice and going in circles - round for round.
by ipsento606 | 2025-10-12 12:12:45+00:00
Edit - this comment is incorrect

---

The title should be edited. It sounds as if the test is 94% accurate at detecting long covid, but in fact it's 94% accurate at counting microclots

> We estimated a 94% accuracy for the microclot count using the devices, significantly higher than the traditional counting of microclots on slides (66% accuracy)
by dwb | 2025-10-12 12:12:59+00:00
Honestly, if the LLM/agent can't do what I want with a simple, shortish prompt that I understand, augmented by some well-chosen tool calls, I'm not interested. These incantations may or may not work, but I just don't want them. Reams of vague twiddling of an unknowable black box. I want the amount of mystery kept at an absolute minimum when I'm programming.
by Scarblac | 2025-10-12 12:15:24+00:00
> Genocide is defined under international law as a crime of intent. Israel was happy to sign a ceasefire agreement as soon as Hamas offered to return the hostages. Therefore Israel had no intent of removing the people of Gaza from Gaza, therefore there was no genocide. This was simply an ordinary war.

It can be both, an ordinary war that is also used as cover for genocide while it is ongoing.
by redhale | 2025-10-12 12:15:40+00:00
In my opinion, subagents (or more generally, "agents as tools" as a pattern) are an order-of-magnitude level feature. Soon every CLI agent will have them as a first-class feature (you can get them via custom scripting right now with and CLI agent, albeit less ergonomically).

The ability to isolate context-noisy subtasks (like agentically searching through a large codebase by grepping through dozens of irrelevant files to find the one you actually need) unlocks much longer-running loops, and therefore much more complex tasks.

And you don't need a system this complicated to take advantage of it. Literally just a simple "codebase-searcher" agent (and Claude can vibe the agent definition for you) is enough to see the benefit first-hand. Once you see it, if you're like me, you will see opportunities for subagents everywhere.
by jhbadger | 2025-10-12 12:16:29+00:00
No. Not at least at serious non-tabloid newspapers and magazines. People who are discovered to have made up stories get canned and drummed out of journalism.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Glass https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claas_Relotius https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jayson_Blair

(among many other examples)
by hdpe | 2025-10-12 12:17:15+00:00
Great list, even if I disagree with many of the ratings!

But astonished that Optional isn't mentioned either there or in the comments. A second way to represent no-value, with unclear and holy-war-ushering guidance on when to use, and the not exactly terse syntax I see everywhere:

Optional<Ick> ickOpt = Optional.ofNullable(ickGiver.newIck()); ickOpt.flatMap(IckWtfer::wtf).ifPresentOrElse((Wtf wtf) -> unreadable(wtf)), () -> { log.warn("in what universe is this clearer than a simple if == null statement?!"); });
by pessimizer | 2025-10-12 12:18:48+00:00
You don't need hierarchy, but you need some sort of process. "Consensus-based" just means that the loudest and most enduring shouters get their way, and when their way fails spectacularly, they leave in a huff (taking their work with them, badmouthing the project, and likely starting a fork that will pull more people out of the project and confuse potential users who just bail on trying either.)

Those people need to be pushed out early and often. That's what voting is for. You need a supermajority to force an end to discussion, and a majority to make a decision. If you hold up the discussion too long with too slim a minority, the majority can fork your faction out of the group. If the end of debate has been forced, and you can't work with the majority, you should leave yourself.

None of this letting the bullies get their way until everything is a disaster, then splitting up anyway stuff.
by ben_w | 2025-10-12 12:19:37+00:00
> They also ask for height, weight, hair/eye color, and race.

My passport doesn't ask for or display height or weight, and only gets hair/eye colour and race implicitly from the photograph.

I'd have a lot of trouble if my passport recorded hair colour in written form rather than a mediocre photo, given it changes naturally all by itself between black in winter and (dark, but definitely) brown in summer.

Also my eyes are on an awkward three-way boundary between blue, green, and grey.

> If someone had to identify your dead body, it would be critical to know your sex.

When, if ever, was that true? Teeth records, finger prints, and/or DNA.

> If there is really a need for it, add an intersex category

Intersex was added. As per the linked article:

Non-Binary Passport Designations: Passports issued with “X” or other non-binary markers will be rejected by CBP systems, requiring resubmission with valid documentation showing “M” or “F” designation.

> and stipulate that you must actually be the biological sex that you register with.

1. Why?

2. Also, when you say "biological" sex, are you using the chromosomal definition, the anatomical definition, or "what you were assigned at birth" which a non-trivial number discover at puberty wasn't either of the other two?
by constantius | 2025-10-12 12:19:43+00:00
Circular reasoning that is completely ignorant of the last 2 years of analysis of media reporting on Gaza.

The evidence of media bias is extensive and extremely blatant: it spans framing ("[horrible event, war crimes, etc.] happened, according to Hamas" vs no such qualification for Israeli claims, "20 people killed in Gaza" without mentioning who or what killed them), dehumanisation ("2 people killed" when reporting on children deaths in Gaza vs "2 teenagers in hospital" when talking about IDF soldiers), selective reporting (remember the pogroms in Amsterdam that got debunked on social media while every chief of state was sending their condolences?), constant repeat of Israeli "right to self-defence" while Palestinian context is not mentioned, etc., etc., etc.

One of many, many, many reports/investigations on this: https://cfmm.org.uk/cfmm-report-media-bias-gaza-2023-24/

If you need something more visual/real-time, Newscord has been been reporting on this consistently: https://newscord.org/editorials

The media might be largely a reputable source, when it doesn't contradict the preferred narrative, and the Gaza genocide was probably the strongest example we could have had of this.

I'm not sure why I even wrote this out, because 2 years in calling it "subjective opinion" is obviously not a position that is based on facts or reason.
by UncleMeat | 2025-10-12 12:19:52+00:00
IMO, people involved in the wrongful imprisonment should be tried and punished liked they committed murder. It is fucking insane that the Supreme Court has made it basically impossible for the cops and DAs involved to see any punishment (civil or criminal) whatsoever even when they deliberately try people that they know are innocent.

Extra repulsive to then decide to deport this person immediately upon release. Just no regard for human life.
by eqvinox | 2025-10-12 12:20:28+00:00
> epoll/kqueue are replacements for their deprecated counterparts poll and select.

Neither poll nor select are deprecated. They're just not good fits for particular use patterns. But even select() is fine if you just need to watch 2 FDs in a CLI tool.

In fact, due to its footguns, I'd highly advise against epoll (particularly edge triggering) unless you really need it.
by fainpul | 2025-10-12 12:20:33+00:00
> Human receptionists were far better than IVRs and “press 3 for” automation, but it was cheaper and good enough.

Good enough? Depends on who you ask. It was and is clearly terrible for the users (customers). People hate to navigate huge, invisible menus by slowly pressing buttons or speaking single words very clearly, but the business doesn't really care about that and deems it "worth it" for the money saved.

This is a pattern one can find all over the place: make something worse but cheaper, as long as someone else, not the business, bears the cost.
by angoragoats | 2025-10-12 12:20:55+00:00
Also, to respond more directly to one thing you said:

> Hopefully he will clarify more what he means in the future so that we won’t have to guess

No one’s guessing here other than you. DHH has been quite clear in what he’s referring to, and if you don’t see that you either haven’t been reading the responses carefully from me and others, or you are being willfully ignorant.
by jiggawatts | 2025-10-12 12:21:00+00:00
> out of a lack of alternative.

I always wonder at the logic that leads the these kinds of statements. What alternate universe do people come from… without Apple?

I regularly see a similar attitude, most often here, that Microsoft and Azure don’t even exist.

Apple and Microsoft are imperfect, sure. But they do exist, and they’re perfectly viable options for … checks notes … billions upon billions of people.
by etskinner | 2025-10-12 12:21:04+00:00
How does it capture the reflection (the iridescence of the fly's body)? It's almost as if I can see the background through the reflection.

I would have thought that since that reflection has a different color in different directions, gaussian splat generation would have a hard time coming to a solution that satisfies all of the rays. Or at the very least, that a reflective surface would turn out muddy rather than properly reflective-looking.

Is there some clever trickery that's happening here, or am I misunderstanding something about gaussian splats?
by jongjong | 2025-10-12 12:21:05+00:00
Yep pretty much. It's just absurd. I wonder if billionaires notice any difference at all going from a net worth of $100 billion to $200 billion. I doubt they feel any difference at all in their lifestyles or happiness levels. Maybe they just get a tiny amount of satisfaction knowing that they're a couple of billions above the next richest person... Well it's basically the same for everyone in this society. The monetary amounts go up but nothing else does.

For most people, it feels like opportunities evaporate and disappear into the void. Nobody gains anything meaningful from the monopolization of opportunities. One regular person's "opportunity of a lifetime" turns into a billionaire's "spam in the inbox".

It's lose-lose but the billionaire may think of this as neutral or "not a problem" from their end. Easily solved by a spam filter, an assistant and a personal security team.
by ElectroBuffoon | 2025-10-12 12:21:12+00:00
It's deeper than that, it's about loyalties among you. Trump wants US military to get paid even with the federal government shutdown. [1] Like your executive fearing mercenaries changing their mind, instead of household troops staying in place when the pay chest takes a bit to show up.

[1] https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ce808gvp56mo

PS: Sorry guys, you fucked up. Hard. And by extension fucked everyone else, so expect no sympathies. We will be busy with the new boss, while trying to keep our democracies not going to crap too. New boss, worse boss than old boss.
by oefrha | 2025-10-12 12:21:57+00:00
To supplement the parent, this is straight from article’s TLDR (emphasis mine):

> In June 2025, I found a critical vulnerability in GitHub Copilot Chat (CVSS 9.6) that allowed silent exfiltration of secrets and source code from private repos, and gave me full control over Copilot’s responses, including suggesting malicious code or links.

> The attack combined a novel CSP bypass using GitHub’s own infrastructure with remote prompt injection. I reported it via HackerOne, and GitHub fixed it by disabling image rendering in Copilot Chat completely.

And parent is clearly responding to gp’s incorrect claims that “…without disclosing how they fixed it. Surely you could just do the base64 thing to an image url of your choice?” I’m sure there will be more attacks discovered in the future but gp is plain wrong on these points.

Please RTFA or at least RTFTLDR before you vote.
by ffsm8 | 2025-10-12 12:22:57+00:00
Well, the hamasho strongly implied with his comment that i3 needs a lot of configuration to be a good window manager, which he isn't willing to maintain as he grows older and wants to spend less time with the OS.

That implication is what's wrong, while his subjective experience of "I prefer Mac OSX" is obviously not wrong, the reason he's citing just don't hold up to critical analysis, hence my own statement that I wish apple enthusiasts in general would be more honest with themselves about their preferences - instead of phrasing it in a way that makes it clear that anything other then MacOS is something for juvenile people that don't have any life experience yet.
by viraptor | 2025-10-12 12:23:08+00:00
> it's useful descriptor for overall physical information

Statistically common physical information, sure. But how is it relevant in this context? For visual identification, you're not really using sex, however you'd define it. It normally means just "looks like a typical person identifying as X would look like" in those situations. (And you have a photo which gives you more information than that)

In other contexts it may be a useful generalisation for physical information, but again, at a country level you can't just ignore millions of people where this doesn't match. And there will always be exceptions - try a challenge and list something that's always true for a given sex, with no exceptions.
by throw_a_grenade | 2025-10-12 12:24:08+00:00
> But as a deeper question: why is gender even listed on a passport in the first place? Why does it matter for the thing a passport does, letting you pass through a port?

There are certain rights that are afforded only to people of certain sex, ranging from relatively insignificant to very serious e.g. special arrangements needed for women in times of war (they need to be interned separately, if not part of thei families). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protected_persons#Women . Unless and until we dispense with sex-based rights, there is a need to accurately record person's sex in the identifying document.
by danielbarla | 2025-10-12 12:24:23+00:00
I think a lot if comes down to the domain, language and frameworks, your expectations, as well as prompt engineering. Having said that, I have had a number of excellent experiences in the past few weeks:

- Case 1 was troubleshooting what turned out to be a complex and messy dependency injection issue. I got pulled in to unblock a team member, who was struggling with the issue. My efforts were a dead-end, but Claude (Code) managed to spot a very odd configuration issue. The codebase is a large, legacy one.

- Case 2 was the same codebase, I again got pulled in to unblock a team mate, investigating why some integration tests were running individually, but not when run as a group. Clearly there was a pretty obvious smoking gun, and I managed to isolate the issue after about 15-30 minutes of debugging. I had set Claude on the goose chase as well, and as I closed the call with my teammate, I noticed it had found the same exact two lines that were causing the issue.

Clearly, it occasionally does insane stuff, or lies its little pants off. The number of times where it "got me" are fairly low, however, and its usefulness to me is extreme. In the cases above, it out-did a teammate who has at least 10 years of experience, and equalled me in the one case and outdid me in the other, with over 25 years now. I have a similar wonderment to your situation, but the opposite: "how are people NOT finding value in this?".