MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by kcexn | 2025-10-19 08:56:42+00:00
I think this talk speaks to an idea that is true for early stage and small businesses. That is software development is a strategic investment not a tactical one. Maybe I don't need a product database and an API just yet, I could use a spreadsheet. But I choose to do it because software can enable teams to capitalize on opportunities more effectively.

Of course, once software becomes mature there will be tactical decisions in the margins. But greenfield software is usually a strategic decision.
by fabian2k | 2025-10-19 08:58:08+00:00
Not going to defend the messaging here, they really didn't do a good job. But the US was doing better than most western countries and inflation was getting lower.

Problem is, the inflation that already happened was still there. And that part is what people notice immediately.

But right now, a part of what is happening is that Trump has been blowing up parts of the economy with his tarrifs and erratic actions. The effect of that is still happening and likely will get worse.
by carra | 2025-10-19 08:59:33+00:00
Things like Borland C and VB/WinForms really do take me to a simpler time. There was joy in being able to write simple programs very fast, in a more intuitive way, without needing to use browsers or frameworks or writing shaders to do the simplest things. Current systems are more powerful and versatile for sure, but for a teenager curious for coding they are a much less welcoming environment in a lot of ways. The ever growing amount of technologies you need to learn now does not help either.
by rsynnott | 2025-10-19 09:01:41+00:00
> I know it might be an offensive way to put it, but I honestly believe if AI ends up making people no longer need to use their brains as much, it's a great thing.

This _might, arguably_ be true, if the output was as good as their output would have been. Very limited evidence right now, but what there is is largely not promising, eg https://www.theregister.com/2025/09/04/m365_copilot_uk_gover...

If we end up with a society of people not thinking and producing nonsense, that seems fairly concerning.
by JetSetIlly | 2025-10-19 09:02:30+00:00
I suspect HiFi culture was slightly different in different parts of the world.

In my part of the world, the original HiFi guys rejected the EQ units. I was influenced by that I think (my father was an original). I still have a metre high stack of HiFi, in almost daily use, and have never felt the need to have an EQ unit.
by rurban | 2025-10-19 09:02:59+00:00
Besides the LLVM drama, we do have a libgcc for jit library now, which uses just the backend to create a better jit than llvm. More speed and more backends.

Did Dave Malcolm contact RMS privately as he said then? I only know about https://gcc.gnu.org/legacy-ml/gcc-patches/2013-10/msg00228.h...

Why did RMS back down then? He still opposes a ffi for emacs, even if behind the scenes there is now a ffi in emacs for gtk.
by Cosi1125 | 2025-10-19 09:03:01+00:00
The `6` is the code, I just put the first thing that came to my mind there :D In my example, if you replace it with a more sophisticated code block, R will evaluate it and print out the result of the evaluation.

Typically, you'd want to parse the unevaluated code, though:

> `if` = function(a, b) { print(substitute(a)); print(substitute(b)) } > if (foo) { print("bar") } foo { print("bar") }

It overwrites `if`, in the current scope, of course.
by SideburnsOfDoom | 2025-10-19 09:03:02+00:00
OK, but that doesn't invalidate anything that I said.

I discussed what I see, that's inherently local not global. There could be places where Tesla sales are slowing down, even if they're net growing globally.

Local is London, UK for me, btw.

I discussed Tesla's as a % of EVs total. A brand such as Tesla could still be e.g. growing sales at 5% per year, but if the EV market is growing at 10% per year, they're still becoming a smaller % of the total number of EVs on the road.

The more interesting trend to me is the proliferation of many different EV brands. Time was when Tesla was the only EV. Then there were a few challengers. Now it's all-in from traditional German brands such as BMW and VW, The Korean Hyundai-Kia group have a lot of new models, through to BYD and the other Chinese newcomers. Even Toyota and Skoda are there now.

I think that something like this Tesla "relative decline even as sales grow" is happening, and this is a natural consequence of the EV market diversifying and maturing. If you really want an EV it doesn't have to be either Tesla or Nissan Leaf any more. There are lots of options and ruling out one specific brand for whatever reason is not going to prevent that.

If you want records, I'll note that 1) The largest EV maker by worldwide volume is now BYD and 2) BYD is pushing hard into the UK market, and others. It's early days for them in the UK, more so for the other Chinese newcomers.

I'm sure you can understand local growth vs. global growth when you look at BYD: They are number 1 globally, but have negligible EV sales in the USA.

And BYD being number one globally underscores that, in a growing market, Tesla can have a record quarter and still be losing % share of the total market.

"Chinese EV giant BYD sees UK sales soar" : https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3w5jl2jgqwo
by spwa4 | 2025-10-19 09:03:12+00:00
If you have a chemical fire at home, first GET OUT OF THERE. Don't do anything. Except perhaps rapidly throw off a piece of clothing that got into contact or has melted into the fire.

If you absolutely must (don't), open the windows (ideally from the outside, with a rock), ideally at least 2 of them, and get out of there.

It's thousands of degrees, so water will make it explode, as will any liquid that can rapidly vaporize. Water will also spread the toxic fumes 10.000x faster than they were spreading before you added water.

The water in the air or water that's somehow gotten near the battery might be enough to make it explode if it's badly engineered, so treat it like it might explode or start sputtering 2000 degree droplets at any time without warning (potentially into your eyes).

Don't try to cover it. There's no use. It doesn't need oxygen, so it won't be put out, and just about anything ignites above 400-500 degrees, so you'll just create new sources of toxic fumes.

Frankly in that youtube movie that initial venting from the battery had gone near his body, we'd be talking weeks in the hospital. If it had gone into his face the video would have suddenly gone silent. That was incredibly irresponsible.
by vanderZwan | 2025-10-19 09:03:34+00:00
Lazy evaluation typically is a language-wide calling convention choice right? With that in mind I'm guessing the first-class block aspect of Rye might make it feel too loaded of a term to use to the author, because Rye's blocks-as-values are more flexible than just that. But maybe one mention of "this is kind of like lazy evaluation" would help.
by 1dom | 2025-10-19 09:03:51+00:00
This might have been the case where you were, but it wasn't everywhere.

I was about 15 at the time, I'd had multiple digital cameras and had a phone with a crappy camera on it. All of my friends had digital cameras. Myspace had already peaked, Facebook was taking off, and that was largely driven by kids taking pictures.

The idea that the ability to take a photo wasn't ubiquitous for big parts of the western world in 2005 doesn't seem accurate.
by uniqueuid | 2025-10-19 09:05:12+00:00
It is immensely frustrating to me that to this day, after a solid century of advances in sciences and mathematical literacy, we are still implicitly stuck in the mental model of averages.

Reality is fucking far away from averages and we know it. "The economy is doing great/terrible" is an almost worthless indicator unless the person you're talking about actually has business relations into every corner.

Yes, there are interdependencies, but they do not justify that we pretend numbers are so expensive we can only print two of them (mean, sd) at a time. Let's finally stop drinking information through a 2 mile straw and instead show high resolution 2d data at least.

[edit] this is of course not a criticism of parent or OP, it's a systemic problem that we all are guilty of.
Ask HN: How to find out "why does this not exist yet"?
by anovikov | 2025-10-19 09:07:57+00:00
TL;DR: Have an idea of a product. Did some research, building it as simple as glueing together a few open source SDKs with some fine-tuning, plus some devops work, should be quick. It appears to be very valuable, and sexy too.

So i understand it smells bad: i can't be the only person who thought of this, and if it doesn't exist yet, it must be a terribly bad "tarpit" idea that's certainly not worthy of working on.

How to find out why in particular is it unworkable? Any repeatable approaches to do research like that?
by npteljes | 2025-10-19 09:09:08+00:00
Myriad of reasons, control being one of the central. By ingesting substances, one can directly influence their inner world, and for many, that possibility alone is priceless. Additionally, most of the popular substances feel good on the short term. Alcohol, for example, lowers stress, and inhibitions in general, so it's easier to strike up a conversation, or to share a vulnerable secret and feel good about it, or to start dancing. So, drinking specifically is attractive in many ways, mostly short term.

>Why would anyone with a brain poison themselves voluntarily?

Getting back to this, some people also hurt themselves, with the specific goal of hurting themselves, or to attain something by it, or to give expression to their feelings. Specifically, I'm meaning self-harm here. And substance abuse can be partly done for self-harming reasons. And therefore it's very bad taste to assert that people doing this "don't have a brain". That's denying part of human experience, which no good person ever did in human history.

Don't get me wrong, it's absolutely valid not to support people harming themselves, or to not understand, or relate as to why they are doing it. But since you see that many people are doing it, you can suppose that it's something you don't understand, rather than all of them being stupid.
by BrenBarn | 2025-10-19 09:11:17+00:00
> I look at Steam as an example here, where while it has its own shady schemes behind the scenes (which I hope are addressed), it otherwise doesn't engage in the same dark patterns as other monopolies.

For now. Google's motto was "don't be evil" until it wasn't.

> I think the main solace here is that you don't need to be dominant to create a good community.

I'm not so sure. I mean, yes, you can create a "good" community on a small scale. But when the system is geared towards larger entities, those communities are always at risk because they don't have a seat at the table, so to speak.

An example that's relevant recently is these laws about age verification. For small communities, things like age verification requirements can be an existential threat. One crazy person with a vendetta can sue them into oblivion for some technical violation, and unlike the big players, they don't have the resources to fight back. They also don't have the resources to lobby for verification mechanisms that are realistic at a small scale.

When the rules of the game are set by the big players, small players are always at risk of being declared in violation, or just having the rules changed in a way that ensures they can't win. I'm coming to think that small communities are not safe unless large networks are either destroyed or severely restricted in a way that involves ongoing monitoring and enforcement. (I hesitate to use the word "community" for these large networks because I don't think something like Facebook is really a community, although there are communities within it.)
by qcnguy | 2025-10-19 09:11:39+00:00
Left wing philosophy did not start and end with Marx. Leftists who pretend 1900s era leftism is somehow the True Left are annoying. He was just one in a series of extremely far left thinkers.

Most people with a good historical education would point to the original leftists being the Jacobins. That's where we get the terms left and right from. But you could also argue that even Jesus Christ was a leftist by the standards of his day, and we just struggle to see it because politics as we know it now didn't exist back then. He wasn't a fan of capitalism! The Bible says he preached peace and then went in with some followers and beat up market traders for no better reason than he thought trade shouldn't be allowed around temples (or we can infer he didn't like markets and traders in general, but having cast himself as a religious figure he had no excuse to rail against it in non-religious places).

> Both parties abandoned class-based politics in favor of cultural appeals.

Yes they did because Marxist thought is wrong and destructive. It should have never been adopted at all but after lots of evidence in the 20th century most people did give it up. The notion of "class" is a poor description of reality. Marxism always had trouble classifying small business owners. They do manual physical labor, so should be working class, but they are also capitalists. He would have been baffled by the ramen eating startup grinders of today. Marxism has no way to properly incorporate this basic and common fact into its thinking. Or, he probably wouldn't be baffled really, because if you read a biography of him it's clear he hardly ever left his study and was uninterested in exploring the real world outside of books and newspapers. His friend Engels invited him to visit a factory Engles owned, and Marx refused, despite supposedly fighting for the factory workers.
by jasode | 2025-10-19 09:13:10+00:00
>This is how Usenet worked: you subscribed to the groups you found interesting and where participants were of sufficient quality. And you further could block individuals whose posts you didn't want to see.

Your explanation actually proves why USENET doesn't work anymore because that client-side moderation is unusable these days. I was on Usenet in the 1980s before the WorldWideWeb in 1993 and continued up until 2008.

Why did I quit Usenet?!? Because it worked better when the internet was much smaller and consisted of universities federating NNTP servers. But Usenet's design can't handle the massive growth of the internet such as commercial entities being allowed to connect in 1992 and "The Eternal September" of massive users from AOL. Spam gets out of control. Signal-to-noise ratio goes way down. Usenet worked better in a "collegial" atmosphere of a smaller internet where it's mostly good actors. It's fundamental design doesn't work for a big internet full of bad actors.

This is why a lot of us ex-Usenet users are here on a web forum that's moderated instead of a hypothetical "nntp://comp.lang.news.ycombinator" with newsgroup readers. With "https://news.ycombinator.com", I don't need to do extra housekeeping of "killfiles" or wade through a bunch of spam.

Whatever next gen social web gets invented, it cannot work like Usenet for it to be usable.

>Spam gets dealt with the moment I see something spammy

Maybe consider you're unusual with that preference because most of us don't want our eyeballs to even see the spam at all. The system's algorithms should filter it out automatically. We don't want to impose extra digital housekeeping work of "dealing with spam" ourselves.
by gizzlon | 2025-10-19 09:13:55+00:00
> The fundamental issue, Kosmyna says, is that as soon as a technology becomes available that makes our lives easier, we’re evolutionarily primed to use it.

> “Our brains love shortcuts, it’s in our nature. But your brain needs friction to learn. It needs to have a challenge.”

"Our brains needs friction to learn" is a good way of summarizing the fundamental problem.

Yes, shortcuts can be great, but they also obviously stop you from actually learning. The question then becomes: Is that a bad thing? Or is the net results positive?

My guess is that "it depends" on the tasks and the missed learning. But losing things like critical thinking, the ability to learn and concentrate could be catastrophic for society and bad for individuals. And maybe we're already seeing the problems this creates in society.
by latexr | 2025-10-19 09:15:27+00:00
Again, please stop telling me what I think. You have zero idea what that is and all your arguments are full of wrong (and frankly unhinged) assumptions. I don’t know what conversation you’re fantasising in your head, but it’s not this one.

> Fair I edited the part that asks “is this for real” that’s literally the only part.

Even if that were true, which I disagree with, that was the very first sentence and set the tone for the entire comment.

> I clearly wasn’t doing that.

That’s not clear in the slightest.

You keep making wrong assumptions and telling other people what they think. You can’t have an honest and productive conversation like that. You’ll never be able to engage in good faith and truly comprehend what the other person is saying until you understand and fix that.
by qcnguy | 2025-10-19 09:15:42+00:00
> So is not being berated for their height, lack of big muscles or whatever it is one "lacks" compared to the model man.

Sounds like you haven't been in the dating pool for a few decades. Go on Tinder and look at what women put in their profiles. Claiming that leftism "liberated" men from being judged by conventional characteristics is delusional. Minimum height requirements are common. Many women also claim to have minimum income requirements.

This stuff has never gone away, of course it has not, why would it? The left never criticizes the behavior of women, only men.

> I am yet to see a single guy from the right correctly define what "patriarchy" means to the left, and understand that the leftist projects by no means intends to harm men as a group.

Your problem is that you're using a theoretical definition that doesn't match reality, and the right use a definition based on observed behavior, so you think they're wrong. But they're not wrong. The sort of people who talk about patriarchy always desire to hurt men as a group, and often do. Citing theory in response should get you laughed at.
by rurban | 2025-10-19 09:16:36+00:00
But unicode support is still nuclear. In unicode you can write the same graphemes in many different ways. And if you go to non-unicode supported language specifics, like ue standing for ü, where the ü can be written in two different ways, with marks and directly, neither ripgrep nor ugrep will help find those substrings. Also the many Arabic subtleties, where there are not only mark combinations, but also more beautiful characters meaning the same graphemes.
by mosselman | 2025-10-19 09:19:07+00:00
I don’t think this is better. Mind you I opened this on my phone.

Overall there is too little space for the titles and the space there is, is given to the branding of the source, so favicon and domain.

I believe the focus should be the content. The hn community overall is quite good at filtering out the nonsense, so if you go to the homepage there will be quality content and having to filter out based on source is not necessary for me.

The approach taken in your design is similar to a search engine where filtering on source credibility or appropriateness IS necessary.

While it looks “modern” I think your redesign proves that flash does not equal good UX
by somenameforme | 2025-10-19 09:20:49+00:00
I don't think it's necessarily an illusion, but rather its repeatedly demonstrated that it requires measure that some might not like. In "Asia" (quotes as it feels odd to characterize an entire continent of dozens of different countries, yet there is often a widely shared ethos on many topics) criminals tend to be largely ostracized from society. And it's not just the criminals, but also their family and relations. This is probably somewhat more akin to what Western society was in the past with things like pillories where the punishment wasn't just the humiliation, but everyone knowing that you were a criminal.

Even the justice systems tend to be different. For instance in the US you're expected to plead not guilty, even if you're guilty - and then work from there. In "Asia" 'falsely' pleading not guilty is often seen as a lack of remorse and generally results in far harsher penalties than pleading guilty. And when one pleads guilty, they're often even required to do things like reenact their crime and generally cooperate with the government in every single way. It's just a very different approach towards criminality.
by DavidPiper | 2025-10-19 09:21:40+00:00
That's an interesting assumption, thank you for clarifying.

I do know a few people who walk through the world with the "everyone else is an idiot" mindset. They're a total pain in the ass and neither of them are particularly successful or particularly happy, irrespective of their (very different) notional social class.

For my part, I look at a title like that and immediately think of the number of hours I've spent doomscrolling, trying to find value in cryptocurrencies, thinking about what impact AI has been having on education, trying to figure out where my life took its various difficult turns...

And I see it more as a criticism of the systems we've built (primarily big tech, but also the industrial complex in general) to create a world where the answer might be yes.
by nly | 2025-10-19 09:21:43+00:00
Windows maintains both a synchronous and asynchronous key state. The async one gives the result of the state of keys in a polled fashion, and the other the state as applied by messages as you pump the the Win32 message queue (it's in sync with respect to messages you have observed from the message queue)

https://devblogs.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20041130-00/?p=37...
by saagarjha | 2025-10-19 09:23:13+00:00
I'm annoyed because you didn't actually come up with an interesting response. Yes, when you make laws people can break them. But you need to explain why there is an incentive to break them, and whether it will happen to the extent that it will actually be a problem to enforce. Personally, I don't see people scrambling to get DDoS attack vectors in their house by any means necessary.
by jiehong | 2025-10-19 09:24:38+00:00
IMO, Hackernews's value is the comment section.

Some things I wish it had while reading comments:

- keyboard shortcut to go to next/previous comment at same level (`j`/`k` a la vim?)

- keyboard shortcut to upvote a comment while it is selected

- memory of which comments I already read, so that when I come back to a comment section, I can navigate directly to the unread comments (useful for conversations that span multiple hours/days). Perhaps also styling read comments differently.
by kees99 | 2025-10-19 09:25:08+00:00
Having too much parameters in your model, so that all of sample/training data is preserved perfectly, is usually considered a bad thing (overfitting).

But you're right - if dataset is exhaustive and finite, and model is large enough to preserve it perfectly - such overfitted model would work just fine, even if it's unlikely to be a particularly efficient way to build it.
by kpmcc | 2025-10-19 09:26:07+00:00
There is a method for dealing with widespread inequality coinciding with generational wealth transfer, it’s called taxation. Tax transfers of wealth. It’s not complicated and doesn’t rely on the goodwill of ‘values-driven, digitally native, and community oriented’ young people.

We have a system designed to incentivize greed. Gross inequality is the result. Taxation is one viable method to deal with such a failure mode.
by InMice | 2025-10-19 09:26:18+00:00
Spacing between comments is pretty wide. Gives me that feeling when they redesign a site and everything is spaced our 2x more than it was before. Some text feels too small at default zoom.

Also you followed original HN here making clicked on links grey, ive always found it annoyingly hard to quikcly spot them in the list after they get turned grey.

Thanks for sharing this