MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by m463 | 2025-10-06 05:33:32+00:00
> Applying for a job or apartment

Let along actually Living in the apartment or working at the job...

A friend's apartment required you to sign up with a third party to get your packages. They made you create an account and accept that they would make pictures and videos of you to access the package room.

Don't even get me started on connected appliances/wifi and app access for doors.
by nisten69 | 2025-10-06 05:34:11+00:00
Complemetely untrue. The evidence is pretty clear. There's no such thing as a low energy country with a high standard of living.

If I were to pick the #1 thing that most European are literally ignorant about is exactly this fact. Data below:

https://www.gapminder.org/tools/#$ui$chart$cursorMode=hand;;...
by keiferski | 2025-10-06 05:34:17+00:00
Forget all of the tech hype cycles and notions of what is outdated, cutting edge frameworks, new exciting languages, what will be replaced by AI, etc.

All that matters now is 1) if your software is straightforward enough to understand and 2) helps drive value for your potential business customers. That’s it. Everything else is just functionally irrelevant.
by layman51 | 2025-10-06 05:36:43+00:00
Something about how you have to keep repeating "There is no seahorse emoji" or something similar reminded me of the Local 58 horror web series where it seems like the program is trying to get you to repeat "There are no faces" while showing the viewer faces: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NZ-vBhGk9F4&t=221
by kragen | 2025-10-06 05:37:47+00:00
Well, if you don't have any such compass, your efforts will be at best ineffectual. But an even more likely reason your efforts will be ineffectual is that the change you want to make is to a point outside the possibility space determined by the internal incentive structures of the institution.

Analogously, you might reckon that the best place for a nickel mine would be on 16 Psyche, because that's where the largest surface nickel deposits are. Or you might reckon that it would be good for an interpreter to give an error when the user attempts to run an infinite loop. But, lacking an interplanetary spaceship or a solution to the Halting Problem, these calculations are of little value.

The most effective response I've found to regulations that harm me is to leave.
by tstrimple | 2025-10-06 05:38:32+00:00
Given the data and research that goes into these sorts of high dollar races, I suspect it wouldn't be very interesting. It would be a relatively simple calculation (that I cannot do and do not know all the variables for) to determine when the benefits of batteries clearly outweigh the benefits of combustion engines with quick and simple refuels. These teams know exactly how many laps they need to complete and the speed they need to do it in order to be competitive. They track the fuel and refuels and other pit stops very closely, so as soon as they can see they would benefit from batteries I'd expect almost the entire fleet to switch over. There will be almost no overlap between electric and combustion cars in races.

The only benefit combustion engines have is the current faster refuel and run time. Everything else about electric motors is far superior to combustion. If and when F1 can hot-swap battery packs efficiently, combustion engines will be dead in that sport.
by luispauloml | 2025-10-06 05:38:35+00:00
> I found the search to be super hit or miss.

I heard similar complaints from friends that came to visit. But they were using the English version of the apps, which, when I tested, were indeed harder to use, but never a miss for me when I helped them. OTOH, I always find my destinations within the first three options when I search in Korean. So maybe it's subpar internationlization.

> They lack a lot of polish. [...] some interactions are janky

I see. I guess I wouldn't know. It's not janky for me, and I think that I am so used to it that when I need to use Google Maps, or any other, I feel a bit frustrated by the unfamiliar interface that I start wishing I could be using Kakao or Naver Maps instead.
by gkanai | 2025-10-06 05:39:03+00:00
It's not that simple.

China has supported key industries (like EVs, batteries, solar, semiconductors) that it views as strategic. Each country should do the same for their own situation. There is no such thing as pure capitalism- and what you see is 'protectionism' is to a lawmaker a way to ensure that the local company survives and provides jobs for the local region/state, etc.

And as the other commenter mentioned, auto manufacturing plants were retooled to make tanks and jeeps in WW2 and so no country that cares about their own military survival should cede auto manufacturing to another country, let alone China.
by the_af | 2025-10-06 05:39:27+00:00
No, I'm entitled to my opinion, and I was replying to your Schumacher comment.

Please, don't be a troll. Learn to accept disagreement without being snarky or dismissive of other opinions.

An example of trollish behavior is intentionally misrepresenting what I said, like you did above ("so you can't"). I disagreed with you, but didn't twist your words.

PS: you'll note TFA is currently flagged, so it seems enough people on HN agreed with me. I won't say I always agree with flagging, and I also understand that the majority isn't always right -- but in this case, at the very least it shows my opinion wasn't an outlier.
by rstuart4133 | 2025-10-06 05:39:49+00:00
> The only problem is that, in (*actual).reality, unsafe Rust is difficult to read, difficult to write, difficult to maintain, difficult to learn, has zero features for ergonomics

All true.

> and has poorly defined rules.

The rules aren't so poorly documented. The options for working with/around them, like say using UnsafeCell, do seem to be scattered across the internet.

But you omitted a key point: unlike C and Zig, unsafe code in Rust is contained. In the Rust std library for example, there are 35k functions, 7.5k are unsafe. In C or Zig, all 35k would be unsafe. If you are claiming those 35k unsafe lines in C or Zig would be easier to maintain safely than those 7.5k lines of unsafe Rust, I'd disagree.
by purge12 | 2025-10-06 05:40:03+00:00
Working on an automated OSINT tool. OSINT is a tough nut to crack because there is so much one can do and the web is literally infinite. So, this tool can automate browsers, it can call functions in a ReAct loop and make inferences on that. It essentially a combination of an investigator + a tool.

This is a demo for the same: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1foBa7mQOJqXcLsD4xpSen7tXMjR...

I have opensourced the tools I am using in order to get some help in refining them. Check out that project here:

https://github.com/FauvidoTechnologies/open-atlas

Use it, scan some targets!
by bravura | 2025-10-06 05:40:37+00:00
You're missing one key point, which is what makes this failure mode unusual.

Namely, that there is (incorrect) knowledge in the training data that "seahorse emoji" exists.

So when prompted: "Does [thing you strongly believe exist]?" the LLM must answer: "Yes, ..."

(The second nuance is that the LLM is strongly encouraged to explain its answers so it receives a lower score just by saying only "Yes.")

But I and probably others appreciate your more detailed description of how it enters a repair loop, thank you.

[edit: I disagree that LLMs are not statistical or probabilistic, but I'm not sure this is worth discussing.]

[edit 2: Google is no longer telling me how many web pages a term responds, but "seahorse emoji" and "lime emoji" quoted both return over ten pages of results. The point being that those are both 'likely' terms for an LLM, but only the former is a likely continuation of 'Does X exist? Yes, ..."]
by MostlyStable | 2025-10-06 05:42:46+00:00
The Framework bios (at least recent ones, but not original, so maybe OP hasn't updated) allow for a setting that, if the power is plugged in continuously, it won't fully charge the battery, even if your normal power limit is 100%.

Here is a knowledgebase article that goes into the details:

https://knowledgebase.frame.work/en_us/framework-laptop-13-b...
by waterTanuki | 2025-10-06 05:43:04+00:00
This is the smoking gun for me:

procedure Overflow_This_Buffer with SPARK_Mode => On is type Integer_Array is array (Positive range <>) of Integer; Int_Array : Integer_Array (1 .. 10) := [others => 1]; Index_To_Clear : Integer; begin Ada.Text_IO.Put ("What array index should be cleared? "); -- Read the new array size from stdin. Ada.Integer_Text_IO.Get (Index_To_Clear); Int_Array (Index_To_Clear) := 0; end Overflow_This_Buffer;

What I am asking is what exactly is formally proving from 1st principles? Because to me this looks no different than a simple assertion statement or runtime bounds check which can be performed in any language with if statements & exceptions.

How did you prove that no one could just put in an arbitrary integer into that function? Does it fail to compile? Then you're just making a custom type which enforces valid state which, again can be done in any language with a rich type system and if statements.

If I might be more blunt: formal proofs in the field of programming appear to be nothing more than mathematicians trying to strong-arm their way into the industry where they aren't necessarily needed. Formal proofs make sense when you're trying to come up with new formulas or studying the cosmos, but they make no sense when you're trying to predict how bits will behave on a computer, because for the most part that is a solved problem by languages themselves.
by rented_mule | 2025-10-06 05:43:11+00:00
> A modern version should, of course, work in a browser, so that there'd be no Python packages to install

Now, only uv needs to be installed (two self-contained binaries). Then you can do `uvx magic-wormhole --help` and it will quickly create a transient environment with the required packages. You don't even need to install Python (uv will do a transient install of Python as well).
by smj-edison | 2025-10-06 05:43:11+00:00
> Most of what gives high-reliability or high-assurance code that label is the process rather than the language.

This is what I've heard too. I have a friend who works in aerospace programming, and the type of C he writes is very different. No dynamic memory, no pointer math, constant CRC checks, and other things. Plus the tooling he has access to also assists with hitting realtime deadlines, JTAG debugging, and other things.
by kragen | 2025-10-06 05:43:36+00:00
That page doesn't say anything about PV. https://www.ise.fraunhofer.de/content/dam/ise/en/documents/p... says that 17 million hectares are used for agriculture in Germany, 48000 hectares are used for golf courses, and (as of 02021) 32000 hectares were used for photovoltaics, which would be 0.2% of the agricultural area. I'm having a hard time finding current figures, but I doubt photovoltaics are more than 2% of the agricultural area yet. I don't think that's why land prices have risen 30%.
by lazyasciiart | 2025-10-06 05:44:13+00:00
Lots, actually. Here's one analysis; https://waynelawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/61Wayn...

Your note about 'proving intent is really hard' is kind of the underlying reason - white collar criminals tend to believe they will never be caught/convicted. So making sentences more severe for those who are caught and convicted doesn't actually impact those future criminals, because their calculations say there's no risk of it being applied to them.
by A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 | 2025-10-06 05:46:15+00:00
Friend. I would advise you against taking posts you read online as some sort of legally binding advice. It.. is just not a good idea. I will make it simple for you. Either ICE is a federal level entity with some rights and immunities assigned to it or not.

If they are and they do, then kidnapping seems like, at best, a mischaracterization. I don't want to belabor the point, but it sounds like you a have an axe to grind.

<< Probably capitalists who want cheap labour and are willing to cut corners to get it

Interesting indeed. Not your answer, but rather the logical inconsistency it implies. How would removal of illegal aliens result in cheap labor? I suspect you did not think your answer through. May I suggest less reflexive writing?
by torginus | 2025-10-06 05:46:30+00:00
Without JIT support, using Linq involves at least allocating an IEnumerator object on the heap, and a closure object, and a delegate to it (if said delegate captures local vars). Each call to `Select` or `Where` is also a virtual call.

This is hugely expensive compared to just a for loop. With this update it seems like the JIT can do escape analysis to stack-allocate the closure object, and the delegate as well (it could devirtualize calls even before that). It seems like it has everything to optimize away the whole LINQ overhead, though I'm not sure what happens in practice.

It'd be neat since that was a major argument against actually using LINQ in perf-sensitive code.
by dtj1123 | 2025-10-06 05:46:35+00:00
I feel that the applicability of the "do one thing and do it well" philosophy scales with the frequency with which you expect to do that thing and the complexity of the task. In the case of a text editor or a VCS it obviously makes sense. In the case of tools that I use a couple times a year like these, having them all grouped together under a 'misc' application is exactly what I need in order to waste time fumbling through my installed apps trying to remember where I left the QR code generator.
by Unearned5161 | 2025-10-06 05:48:12+00:00
I'm surprised at the lack of mentioning the effects of gambling on the thing being gambled on!

Sure gambling will always happen wherever there's something with uncertainty. But to make it fully legal opens the doors wide open for growth, leading to the only possible outcome of "more money being bet". I think it would be naive to assume that the integrity of any sport stays stable when such a large amount of money is staked on it.
by golem14 | 2025-10-06 05:48:27+00:00
I have such a NAS for 8 years, (and a smaller netgear one from maybe 16 years ago), and have yet such a disk fail. But you can get unlucky, buying a supposedly new but "refurbished" item via amazon or the seagate store (so I hear), or have the equivalent of the "death star" HDDs, which had a ridicilously high burnout rate (we measured something like > 10% of the drives failed every week across a fairly large deployhment in the field - major bummer.

If you use such consumer drives, I strongly suggest to make occasional offsite backups of large mostly static files (movies for most people I guess), and frequent backups of more volatile directories to an offsite place, maybe encrypted in the cloud.
by OCTAGRAM | 2025-10-06 05:51:08+00:00
Also self-hosted server helps.

But the problem with them is lack of accessible management. Like, so I can tell grandfather: if you want to be mobile and powerful, go buy this one precise box, match mobile with box and install programs from here. And programs could auto-detect personal server and make use of it. For instance, a browser may store a history on a personal server and index it. Currently any such feature are only possible via corporate-owned servers, and that is not going to change until widely accepted private server OS come.

As I imagine that, it should look like a store program on mobile. Like NashStore or AppGallery. But with requirement to have personal server and with some background service to help server and mobile parts of program find each other.
by degamad | 2025-10-06 05:52:04+00:00
Your piece is well-written, but embeds an important assumption that leads to your conclusion being different from Ed's.

> And how can TV retailers make money in this situation? Did they expect to keep charging $500 for a TV that’s now really worth $200, and pocket the $300 difference?

> Why, then, is Ed Zitron having such a hard time when it comes to LLM inference? It’s exactly the same situation!

The AI situation is not analogous to one where the TVs initially costed $450 to manufacture and the stores were selling them for $500, then the manufacturing cost went down.

The equivalent TV analogy is that we're selling $600-cost TVs for $500 hoping that if people start buying them, the cost will drop to $200 so we can sell them for $300 at a profit. In that situation, if people keep choosing the $600-cost/$500-price unprofitable TVs, the existence of the $200-cost/$300-price profitable TVs that people aren't buying don't tell us anything about the market's future.

---

In the AI scenario that prompts all the conversations about the "cost of inference", the reason that we care about the cost is that we believe that it's currently *ABOVE* what the product is being sold for, and that VC money is being used to subsidise the users to promote the product. The story is that as the cost drops, it will eventually be below the amount that users are willing to pay, and the companies will magically switch to being profitable.

In that scenario, anything which forces the cost above the revenue is a problem. This applies to customers choosing to switch to more expensive models, customers using more of the service (due to reasoning) while paying fixed rates, or customers remaining on free plans rather than switching to affordable profitable paid plans.

The AI Hype group believes that the practical cost of providing inference services to users will drop enough that the $20/month users are profitable.

The AI Hype group's argument is that because the cost per token is coming down, that means we're on a trajectory to profitability.

The AI Bubble group believes that the practical cost of providing inference services to users is not falling fast enough.

Ed's argument is that despite the cost per token coming down, the cost per request is not coming down (because requests now require more advanced models or more tokens per request in order to be useful), so we are not on a trajectory to profitability.
by the_af | 2025-10-06 05:54:40+00:00
Well, enough people agreed to flag the article... "AI slop" is a well understood term here, enough that people know what I mean and agreed with it. It carries meaning; I don't need to spell out why it's slop (especially since the author essentially admitted it is, in other words. Paraphrasing someone else in this comments section, "if you can't make the effort to write it, why should I make the effort to read it?").

And you can disagree with my disagreement without resorting to snark.
by littlestymaar | 2025-10-06 05:54:41+00:00
Well first of all neither you and I knows the decryption capabilities of the NSA, all we know is that they have hired more cryptologists than the rest of the world combined.

Also, it's much easier for an intelligence service to get the hand on a 1kB encryption key than on a PB of data: the former is much easier to exfiltrate without being noticed.

And then I don't know why you bring encryption here: pretty much none of the use-case for using a cloud allow for fully encrypted data. (The only one that does is storing encrypted backups on the cloud, but the issue here is that the operator didn't do backups in the first place…)
by sails | 2025-10-06 05:55:42+00:00
> This isn't just a coding problem; it's a reasoning problem.

I’ve been trying to get Claude to make 3d visuals for Remotion.dev

It does a reasonable job, but really struggles to do more complex 3D visualisations.

It feels like a lack of feedback problem. It can’t validate when the output is wrong (like frontend design I guess).

Interested to know what models generated the code
by morshu9001 | 2025-10-06 05:56:24+00:00
Go's biggest flaw for backends is the error handling. No exceptions and nothing checking that you use the err.

Java's issue might be the lack of cooperative multitasking until recently (virtual threads). Best you could do was those promises frameworks that mangle your code, and Google in particular uses something a hundred times worse called Guice (which is also DI).
by captainmuon | 2025-10-06 05:56:51+00:00
LLMs are just the speech center part of the brain, not a whole brain. It's like when you are speaking on autopilot, or reciting something by heart, it just comes out. There is no reflection or inner thought process. Now thinking models do actually do a bit of inner monologue before showing you the output so they have this problem to a much lesser degree.
by dang | 2025-10-06 05:56:56+00:00
For starters, the guideline against calling names ("piece of shit") and the guideline against fulminating.

HN is supposed to be, above all, for curious conversation. No doubt people do reprehensible things, but taking revenge on them for it in internet comments simply isn't curious conversation. It's not a question of whether you're right or not—you may well be completely right—but it's not what this site is for.
by kronicum2025 | 2025-10-06 05:57:24+00:00
> I don’t understand this sentiment at all. They didn’t sacrifice their balcony, and this is electricity that the central utility organizations couldn’t generate. Many parts of the world don’t even allow this kind of solar panel to be used by individuals, so its legality is actually a policy success.

Completely disagree. This is definitely electricity that central utility organizations could generate. A central method to generate electricity with solar panels would benefit everyone. This method only benefits the individuals who have their own homes or have balconies.

The biggest problem with the above is that now the govt has even less visibility on planning their electricity needs and therefore cannot plan electric infrastructure better. Also, each home is now a single point of failure for its own electricity and this will inevitably feed back to the main grid.

The real reason this is happening is because govt is in policy paralysis and cannot provide cheap electricity from solar themselves and have to depend on each individual doing it on its own.
by AlotOfReading | 2025-10-06 05:57:27+00:00
C and C++ don't have such a subset. That seems pretty relevant, given they're the languages being compared and they're used for the majority of safety critical development.

The standards I mentioned use tricks to get around this. MISRA, for example, has the infamous rule 1.3 that says "just don't do bad things". Actually following that or verifying compliance are problems left completely to the user.

On the other hand, Safe Rust is the default. You have to go out of your way to wrap code in an unsafe block. That unsafe block doesn't change the rules of the language either, it just turns off some compiler checks.
by 7bit | 2025-10-06 05:57:58+00:00
I've been using tt-rss.org for years. It's good software, but at the same time still feels kinda clunky. There much to improve still, so I would argue that there's more left in that space than bugfixes. But seeing that he lost interest is probably part of the reason there isn't much meaningful development on that front.

Anyway, thanks for all the work the original dev and all contributors put into it, specifically thanks to the original developer for all his time and effort.
Show HN: RenzMcLang – Bahasa Pemrograman Berbasis Bahasa Indonesia
by RenzMc | 2025-10-06 05:58:14+00:00
Halo semuanya!

Aku ingin memperkenalkan RenzmcLang, bahasa pemrograman yang menggunakan Bahasa Indonesia. Belajar coding jadi lebih mudah karena sintaksnya pakai kata yang familiar, tetap bisa bikin program nyata.

Fitur utama: - Sintaks Bahasa Indonesia yang mudah dipahami - Pemrograman Berbasis Objek (kelas, konstruktor, metode) - Integrasi langsung dengan Python

Contoh cepat: # Kelas sederhana kelas Mahasiswa: konstruktor(nama, nim): diri.nama itu nama diri.nim itu nim selesai

metode info(): tampilkan f"Nama: {diri.nama}, NIM: {diri.nim}" selesai

selesai

mhs1 itu Mahasiswa("Budi Santoso", "12345") mhs1.info()

Install cepat: pip install renzmc

Masukan & ide kalian bakal bantu RenzmcLang jadi lebih berguna.