MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by a4isms | 2025-10-31 19:08:56+00:00
OG HN mainstay Joel Spolsky put it incredibly presciently back when Napster was a thing in 2001. The music studios were all raving about theft, but he pointed out that people weren't filesharing mp3s to save a buck, they were filesharing mp3s because, his words: You can type the name of a song and listen to it right away.

https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2001/04/21/dont-let-architect...

TV still doesn't get this for TV shows. Yes, I can type the name of a show. There are two options, one is some streaming service, the other is Prime. So I select Prime. Psych! It offers me the option to go to that streaming service. And subscribe. Which means thinking about the long term, not this show I want to watch.

Or I open the lid of my Mac, type the name of a show, and almost right away I can watch it on my Apple TV.
by K0HAX | 2025-10-31 19:09:13+00:00
Instead of 1 doctor covering a 24 hour shift, why not pair them and overlap?

12:00am - 6:00am: Doctor 1 and Doctor 4 are doing everything together.

6:00am - 12:00pm: Doctor 1 and Doctor 2 are doing everything together.

12:00pm - 6:00pm: Doctor 2 and Doctor 3 are doing everything together.

6:00pm - 12:00am: Doctor 3 and Doctor 4 are doing everything together.

This way, all 4 doctors only do 12 hour shifts, and the patient's state is maintained continuously through all 24 hours.
by Calavar | 2025-10-31 19:09:15+00:00
If you are serving web pages, you are soliciting GET requests, kind of like ordering a package is soliciting a delivery.

"Taking" versus "giving" is neither here nor there for this discussion. The question is are you expressing a preference on etiquette versus a hard rule that must be followed. I personally believe robots.txt is the former, and I say that as someone who serves more pages than they scrape
by palmotea | 2025-10-31 19:09:17+00:00
> These are mostly men, and a very specific type of men. You can try to curtail their access to gambling but we're missing the underlying problem.

You should address that too, but gambling is frankly a parasitic business meant to exploit such people, and we should not let the perfect be the enemy of the good by avoiding the re-abolishment of such a pernicious industry.
by ThrowawayB7 | 2025-10-31 19:09:39+00:00
The breakthrough aspect of the iPhone was enabling gestures and a very usable UI without having to use a stylus. This is despite the much lower precision of the capacitive touchscreen tech available in that era.

Other smartphones and PDAs back then used more precise resistive touchscreens that required an annoying pressure stylus because it was a way to get more usability out of the very small screens that devices were limited to.
by bell-cot | 2025-10-31 19:09:39+00:00
Seems a bit shallow.

The real downfall of the great British houses (architectural sense) was the financial catastrophe that 1914 to 1946 was for the British Empire. Top billing in two world wars - and they went from being blatantly the richest and most powerful nation on earth, to needing a US Treasury bail-out to avoid national bankruptcy.

(Though over in America, most of the historic grand mansions are now tourist attractions, for lack of heirs with the wealth and interest in maintaining them.)

And the benefits of British aristocratic titles faded over quite a few centuries, not just recently. Compare King Charles I of the early 1600's (Parliament didn't like his exercise of Divine Right) with George III of the later 1700's (a clever King could appoint his own Prime Ministers against Parliament's wishes) with Queen Victoria of the later 1800's (she complained to the PM that the Foreign Secretary was taking actions without her approval) with Queen Elizabeth II of the later 1900's (she dutifully read her supposed "Queen's Speech" to Parliament, whether she agreed with a word of it or not).
by nutjob2 | 2025-10-31 19:09:45+00:00
Surprisingly, when you depend on Russia oil and gas for your refineries and industry for decades, you can't always turn it off instantly, it sometimes takes many years due to infrastructure and for come countries, pro-Putin politics.

Being anti US isn't 'trendy', it is a response to the US being anti-EU at the moment, and justifiably being seen as unreliable, mercurial and even dangerous.
by jarek83 | 2025-10-31 19:10:19+00:00
The type of developers that would go with <div> in such cases are also those that know very, extremely little about semantic HTML and its purpose. Then if one is challenged about using React or other heavy-JS framework when you don't really have to, the discussion will be met with utter even surprise that someone out there is actually not using React.

The web is darn simple, but we are the place where it is made extremely over engineered and expensive for both companies (salaries and 2-3x more staff needed than necessary because of the bloat) and users of their products (in terms of payloads).

And yet JS-heavy frameworks seems to have the best job market.

Everything seems to be upside down.
by phantasmish | 2025-10-31 19:10:49+00:00
In the right circumstances and frame of mind, symphonies or sometimes brass band tunes play in my head, multilayered and everything. They've even got enough persistence that I can "rewind" them a few seconds (probably within some kind of working-memory window), even isolate parts of them and usually know exactly what instrument is playing it, and so on, then let them continue. The course of them is automatic, I don't control them, though.

If I had the first clue how to record them, perhaps I'd have a career as a composer, LOL. The actual invention of them would be no work whatsoever, though the writing it down would be, and I'm sure there'd be a good deal of editing and arranging afterwards to fix them up (plus, who's to say if they'd be any good, or wouldn't all sound kinda the same, to a trained ear?)

I'm only barely familiar with the body of "classical" music, and even less familiar with big-band or brass band music, is the oddest part, but those couple narrow sorts of instrumental music are all I get without having to put effort into it (and I mean none, it just "plays" when I'm in the right head-space and surroundings, and no I don't mean "on drugs", and actually it can be really fucking annoying if I'm trying to sleep). I wouldn't be surprised if I actually lost that ability (such as it is) if I tried to train up enough to write the tunes down.

... maybe I should look into humming-to-MIDI software, hahaha.
by ErroneousBosh | 2025-10-31 19:10:56+00:00
> If you want to do an operation on fooA, you don't mutate fooA. You call fooB = MyFunc(fooA) and use fooB.

This is the bit I don't get.

Why would I do that? I will never want a fooA and a fooB. I can't see any circumstances where having a correct fooB and an incorrect fooA kicking around would be useful.
by galaxyLogic | 2025-10-31 19:11:08+00:00
> they're unaware of the proper way to disable submit behavior.

That is an issue in favor of DIV, you don't accidentally set type="submit" because you don't know about that. There are many things many people don't know.

Using a DIV means you start from empty plate and explicitly add the features you want to add, which makes it easy to later remove or change those features when you want to.

Of course if your knowledge of HTML standards is great and Button exactly fits your current use-case you probably will use it, but designs and requirements change all the time.

Using DIV makes your design more transparent, you see there are certain features you have set to it by adding the attributes.

Using a Button means you (and other people reading your code) probably want to consult documentation to understand what it exactly does. With a DIV + attributes that is explicitly "spelled out".

Just some pros and cons.
by riku_iki | 2025-10-31 19:11:26+00:00
> then reasoning LLMs seem to pass that bar as they do very well programming and maths competitions.

it could be this is just result of good stochastic parroting and not reasoning. Both of those niches are narrow with high amount of training data (e.g. corps buying solutions from leetcode and training LLMs on them).

From another hand we see that LLMs fail in more complex environment: e.g. ask to build some new feature in postgres database.
by usrusr | 2025-10-31 19:11:54+00:00
Some languages like Kotlin have var and val introducing the distinction between variables (that are expected to get reassigned, to vary over time, and values, which are just that, a value that has been given a name. I like these small improvements.

(unfortunately, Kotlin then goes on and introduces "val get()" in interfaces, overloading the val term with the semantics of "read only, but may very well change between reads, perhaps you could even change it yourself through some channel other than simple assignment which is a definite no")
by jimbokun | 2025-10-31 19:12:39+00:00
Jobs and Ive were at the core of all the product design.

There were multiple articles about Jobs spending most of his day with Jony looking at prototypes Jony's team had devised and giving critiques and feedback. Then they would iterate on what Jobs said.

Of course the engineering team had to figure out how to make Jobs suggestions real within the physical and technological constraints they were working with.

> I think the proof of Ive's excellence will come out of this next OpenAI project.

I think Ive's lack of high profile success since Jobs passed away shows Jobs true talent. He was a taste savant. A genius for figuring out what people would like and building a team capable of building those things at scale.

Ive could take Jobs ideas and come up with a concrete design for making them real. But he doesn't have that instinct for figuring out what kinds of products people want in the first place.

I would love to know what Jobs would have done with AI to make it into something people want to use, instead of being terrified it's just going to put them out of work.
by filoleg | 2025-10-31 19:12:45+00:00
> There are so many base features that are inexplicably relegated to 3rd party apps.

> Like a better finder experience.

> Or keeping screen on.

Do you mind linking or naming which tools you use for those 2 purposes?

Asking out of pure curiosity, as for keeping the screen on, I just use `caffeinate -imdsu` in the terminal. Previously used Amphetamine, but I ended up having some minor issues with it, and I didn't need any of its advanced features (which could definitely be useful to some people, I admit, just not me). I just wanted to have a simple toggle for "keep the device and/or display from sleeping" mode, so I just switched to `caffeinate -imdsu` (which is built-in).

As for Finder, I didn't really feel the need for anything different, but I would gladly try out and potentially switch to something better, if you are willing to recommend your alternative.
by sjducb | 2025-10-31 19:12:47+00:00
Yes many contracts contain unenforceable or unactionable clauses that are superseded by common law. This is an example of that.

For example a tennant can sign a lease that says they have no notice period before eviction. If they’re in a state with a 30 day minimum notice period then the notice period is 30 days. It doesn’t matter what the contract says.

Google would comply with the US court order and ignore the contract it signed with Israel.
by MarkMarine | 2025-10-31 19:13:12+00:00
I have dreams of being at a “Clojure shop” but I fear daily professional use might dull my love for the language. Having to realize that not everyone on my team wants to learn lisp (or FP) just to work with my code (something I find amazing and would love to be paid to do) was hard.

On a positive note I have taken those lessons from clojure (using values, just use maps, Rich’s simplicity, functional programming without excessive type system abstraction, etc) and applied them to the rest of my programming when I can and I think it makes my code much better.
by notatoad | 2025-10-31 19:13:48+00:00
nah, performance benefits are mostly wasted on consumers, because consumer hardware is very infrequently CPU-constrained. in a datacentre, a 1% improvement could actually mean you provision 99 CPUs instead of 100. but on your home computer, a 1% CPU improvement means that your network request completes 0.0001% faster, or your file access happens 0.000001% faster, and then your CPU goes back to being idle.

an unobservable benefit is not a benefit.
by pstuart | 2025-10-31 19:14:19+00:00
As someone who believes in legalizing all drugs and in general "personal freedoms", I'd add recreational drugs to this list.

The demand will always be there but there should be strong incentives to not incentivize use (e.g., the Purdue Pharma debacle). We're better served by having these markets addressed by legit players rather then criminal cartels.

I'm not sure what the best solution is, but unfettered promotion to consume is not the way.
by brabel | 2025-10-31 19:14:22+00:00
Sorry but I have to mention that Nazi Germany became incredibly prosperous, but it decided to use its wealth to obtain military power.

Also, Europe dominated the world for a couple of hundred years before the Great War. Some parts of Europe may have been poor during that time, but compared to the rest of the world I do think it was a whole lot better.

Japan was incredibly rich in the beginning of the 20th century - and it was definitely not a democracy. Australia, Canada and NZ are all part of the ex-British Empire and I would say that's what made them prosperous, not their political system.

South Korea rode on the back of US support, like Japan after the war, but I do agree they did that while being mostly democratic.

Uruguay has just very recently become a nice place due to basically a single guy! That president, Jose Mujica, was such a legend! And a big critic of capitalism , by the way.

Taiwan was what we used to call the "Asian Tigers" that became rich in an incredibly fast manner... I don't know that you can attribute that to a political system at all: Singapore was and is a dictatorship and is perhaps the best example of Asian Tiger - it became richer than Australia in like 20 years!

All in all: you do not convince me. You do not seem to understand what made those countries rich in my opinion and you haven't really reflected on it if you really think that democracy was the common theme.

EDIT: Taiwan is a tiny island, China is a huge country. The GDP percapita of Shanghai and Beijing is about the same as Taiwan... Hong Kong and Macau, also part of China, have much larger GDP/pc still.
by mystifyingpoi | 2025-10-31 19:14:51+00:00
While I agree with basically all of the points presented, I really dislike the code example.

> This code is AWS-specific from top to bottom:

Well, that's because it is the integration layer, written by hand in Python. Of course it will be different for each provider. If you want something more abstract, try a framework that does it for you, like Spring Cloud Function.
by tangus | 2025-10-31 19:15:29+00:00
For the record, if you want to avoid the creation of intermediate arrays, you can:

lst.lazy.grep(Array).flat_map(&:itself).sum

Not as clear, because the standard library doesn't have a `#flatten` method for lazy enumerators.

But the point is the interface, not the implementation. Efficiency doesn't mandate assembly-like DSLs. Your interface could be as clear and clean as Ruby's and produce fast, inlined code by the power of macros. Ruby doesn't have macros, so chaining lambdas is the best it can do.

Ruby also has call/cc. None of the iterating methods has any provision to make them "safe" from it. They aren't safe from modifications to the iterated collection either. I think it makes sense; being forced to accumulate using only linked lists and having to be constantly on guard to support a rarely used quirky feature is a bad tradeoff IMO.
by SR2Z | 2025-10-31 19:15:43+00:00
> You're skipping n = 1 and jumping straight to k. How did modern Shenzen become what it is? Through specific reasons like infrastructure investment, or because it was always a 'manufacturing cluster'? By your logic Shenzen must have been the manufacturing hub of the world since before the dawn of time... since it's 'impossible for any place to become Shenzen'.

Sure, any region in a rapidly developing and very dense country, with a large preexisting financial hub nearby, 50 years ago, could have become Shenzen. There was only one of those, and consequently there is only one Shenzen. How far back do you want me to go? Should I discuss the agglomeration effects enjoyed by the Han Dynasty?

> Because the only way to meet and communicate in 2025 is in person?

Why don't you try using that logic on someone you're convincing to give you a large sum of money and report back? The real world does not work this way, and that is why there is still only one Silicon Valley. I've made this point several times now and can point to the status quo to back it up.

> All of these are better remote/digitally in most cases.

I work partially remote. I intentionally schedule my meetings in person because I find that to be significantly better than a video call. I am definitely not alone, and for startups it is even more advantageous to physically be in the same room as the entire rest of the company.
by ErroneousBosh | 2025-10-31 19:15:44+00:00
> It means any part of your program with a reference to the original list will not have it change unexpectedly.

I don't get why that would be useful. The old array of floats is incorrect. Nothing should be using it.

That's the bit I don't really understand. If I have a list and I do something to it that gives me another updated list, why would I ever want anything to have the old incorrect list?
by LeoPanthera | 2025-10-31 19:16:00+00:00
Historically, traditional matte screen finishes exhibited poor optical qualities by scattering ambient light, which tended to wash out colors. This scattering process also affected the light from individual pixels, causing it to refract into neighboring pixels.

This reduced overall image quality and caused pixel-fine details, such as small text, to appear smeary on high-density LCDs. In contrast, well-designed glossy displays provide a superior visual experience by minimizing internal refraction and reflecting ambient light at high angles, which reduces display pollution. Consequently, glossy screens often appear much brighter, blacks appear blacker without being washed out, colors show a higher dynamic range, and small details remain crisper. High-quality glass glossy displays are often easy to use even in full daylight, and reflections are manageable because they are full optical reflections with correct depth, allowing the user to focus on the screen content.

Apple's "nano texture" matte screens were engineered to solve the specific optical problems of traditional matte finishes, the washed-out colors and smeary details. But they cost more to make. The glossy option is still available, and still good.
by pdonis | 2025-10-31 19:16:32+00:00
> The claim that everything is there does not imply infinite, or even large capacity.

It implies enough capacity to store everything. But what you describe is not storing everything.

> lossy compression

Which means you're not storing all the information. You're not storing everything.

> When you gain more information, graph weights are updated, essentially compressing what was already in there further.

In other words, each time you store a new memory, you throw some old information away.

Which the person I was responding to said does not happen.
by bugsliker | 2025-10-31 19:16:44+00:00
I'm saying tabindex=0 is naturally sorted wrt other naturally focusable elements. That matches the behavior of the <button> you're trying to emulate. I don't know what tabindex>0 has to do with this.

See this fiddle https://jsfiddle.net/483uqjnp/

(again, I do not condone building your own <button>, just pointing this out)
by foresto | 2025-10-31 19:16:57+00:00
> He is also very difficult to work with and isn't very welcoming to newcomers.

That's a charitable way to describe him. In our one direct interaction, he was condescending to the point of insult. (I believe he was incorrect as well, but even if he was always correct, I would consider it wrong to treat someone badly.) After browsing the Nim forum and issue tracker, I found that this was routine behavior for him.

Nim has some nice features, but I don't want to depend on anything that's subject to the whims of a personality like that, and I certainly don't want to interact with him again.
by thyristan | 2025-10-31 19:17:00+00:00
> The proper way of dealing with this is a "Skip to Main Content" element: > > https://webaim.org/techniques/skipnav/

No, it isn't the proper way. That only works if you can see the skip link and know to press enter. Otherwise you will tab straight into the navigation. So possibly useful for screen readers, but completely useless for most keyboard users. Yet another stupid webdev workaround for a selfimposed problem.

What you should do is autofocus the first form element (if there is a form), give it tabindex=1 and number the other form elements in a sensible ascending tabindex order. Otherwise, proper semantic markup is sufficient, even for screen readers.
by mandevil | 2025-10-31 19:17:02+00:00
Merit is from Latin, and cracy is a Greek suffix, so combining them together is nonsense. Aristo has the advantage of actually being Greek for "the best."

The word meritocracy was actually popularized (1) by British Labour Party politician Michael Young in his 1958 satirical novel "The Rise of the Meritocracy" which was basically the Idiocracy of its day- in the future idiots will reign supreme sort of thing. But the book was definitely meant to mock the entire idea of society that we live in today. Right down to how the society in the book defined "merit" as basically IQ plus how hard you work, it was a dystopia that came true.

1: Apparently someone else actually coined the term two years earlier in a peer reviewed paper, but Young was where it broke through into general use.
by 1-more | 2025-10-31 19:17:45+00:00
what's annoying about that example is that all of those <div>s could be buttons with no other changes. The only content inside the button <div> is the title and folder icon, not the list of examples associated with that title. That's just fine for a button!

The other thing I'd do is add `aria-controls=folder0` to the button that toggles visibility of the list with `id=folder0`
by krackers | 2025-10-31 19:18:41+00:00
ARC-AGI v3 is a pretty good benchmark, and it's notably different from the other ARC-AGI in that it has a "truer" human baseline (you can go play it right now and add your datapoint), and captures the act of in-context learning better as you start an unfamiliar game then master it over time.

Also bottom 10% feels like a bad comparison, median human would be better. And unlike "specialized" things like programming, game playing is something almost all of us have done.
by austin-cheney | 2025-10-31 19:19:00+00:00
I have always wondered about this with regard to Newton's Third law:

For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

So if a craft departs from rendezvous with another craft it must do so by pushing away from that other craft. That means it is equally pushing on both crafts. If the rendezvous was in orbit does that mean departing from rendezvous pushes both crafts out of orbit? If so does the other craft have to correct for this to reestablish orbit or is orbit self-correcting as if in a third body scenario?

I ask because Earth is an third body scenario between the sun and Jupiter. Jupiter has enough gravity to occasionally pull the Earth slightly (not significantly) out of orbit from the Sun, but Earth's orbit to the Sun is self-correcting due to the difference in mass between the Sun and Jupiter. Quick web searching reveals Jupiter's pull on Earth is only approximately 0.005% of the Sun's after accounting for both mass and distance, but that number rises to 0.011% after accounting for syzygy with the moon.