MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by FireBeyond | 2025-10-04 16:43:18+00:00
Don't act like this is the solution. It's the same as "religious people give more to charity than secular" which rapidly becomes untrue if you remove "their church" as the charity, in which case secular people tend to give more.

But, you say, it's the church that is doing all that charitable work, so why should it get removed from that accounting?

Religious people like to point to charitable giving.

But studies performed by religious organizations themselves (who, if anything, are likely to skew the numbers more positively) show that across the board, "Local and national benevolence receives 1 percent of the typical church budget," and an additional 5% goes to "church-run programs" (be it after-school care, social, or group activities).

If a secular charity - and let's go to Charity Navigator here - Top Ten Inefficient Fundraisers (https://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=topten), we see some of the worst charities spending 15% of their donations on "program expenses" (i.e., doing what they are being given money to do).

I'm not familiar with the monitoring of 501(c)3 groups, but I suspect if secular charities regularly spent only one percent of their givings on what they were entitled to enjoy tax exemption for, they'd likely have such a status revoked.

And, if you factor in this average percentage (even the six per cent combined, which is generous, as as much fun as social and youth activities are, they're not necessarily serving a critical need), and start to question 'how much money is being spent on 'spreading the word', patting themselves on the back, competitions in Texas to see who can built the world's biggest cross just down the road from where the world's previously biggest cross was built at costs of millions, there comes more and more skepticism of just how highly you can value "giving to your church" on the scale of charitable contributions.

A study by ECCU (https://web.archive.org/web/20141019033209/https://www.eccu....) stated that churches use 3 percent of their budget for children’s and youth programs, and 2 percent for adult programs. Local and national benevolence receives 1 percent of the typical church budget.
by justupvoting | 2025-10-04 16:43:46+00:00
It's funny you mention it; I have a friend who writes books who had trouble with McCarthy and I recently mentioned this same criticism. I suggested ATPH to her and this same character came to mind as a decent piece of work on that subject.

I will say this about the passage tho: McCarthy writes a small narrative which does seem to explain her choices and character as it affects John Grady. It's convincing, and she's a good character, but even there she's something of a set piece.

Still, glad you mentioned this. Thanks.
by spenrose | 2025-10-04 16:43:52+00:00
Claude Sonnet 4.5 summary of the original paper [https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.adw1280] for middle school students:

How Earth Got Its Water: A Cosmic Detective Story

The Big Question: How did Earth become a planet with oceans and life, when it formed so close to the hot Sun?

What Scientists Did:

- They used a "radioactive clock" made from two elements: manganese and chromium - Manganese-53 breaks down into chromium-53 over time (like ice melting at a steady rate) - By measuring these elements in meteorites and Earth rocks, they figured out WHEN Earth's basic chemistry was locked in

Key Finding: Earth's chemical recipe was set within just 3 million years after the Solar System formed (that's super fast in space terms!)

The Problem: At that point, early Earth was missing the ingredients for life—especially water, carbon, and other "volatile elements" (stuff that evaporates easily when hot)

Why Earth Was Dry: Close to the Sun, it was too hot for water and other volatile stuff to stick to the rocks that built Earth—they stayed as gas and floated away

The Solution: About 70 million years later, another planet called Theia (which formed farther from the Sun where it was cooler) crashed into Earth:

This collision created our Moon It also delivered water and other life-essential ingredients to Earth

The Big Takeaway: Earth needed a cosmic accident to become livable. Without that lucky collision bringing water from the outer Solar System, we wouldn't be here!

Why This Matters: If Earth needed such specific, lucky events to support life, habitable planets like ours might be much rarer in the universe than we thought.
by eszed | 2025-10-04 16:45:36+00:00
If I get into a rhythm with the "advance ten-seconds" button between plays I can get down to around an hour, without missing any plays, or pre-snap action. It'd be a lot less, even, but there are times we want to see the replays, and other times I "miss" and have to jump back. It's amazing how much dead time there is in American football.
by quitit | 2025-10-04 16:45:36+00:00
There's a great deal of bikeshedding in the world of design.

Sure everyone can design, but there is value in having a team of people who specialise in design, and then having that enforced across the OS.

Design also means giving up on my wonderful ideas for how I think an app should work and subscribe to mimicking how the OS functions: not because this is the optimal design, but because it's going to be the most intuitive for the -user-.

The strength of OSS is the huge amount of experimentation that can go on by having everyone execute their own ideas, this however is not conducive to a unified harmonious design.
by verdverm | 2025-10-04 16:45:42+00:00
> why do I want a global login? that sounds like hell

Ask social media users if they would like one account or separate accounts for every platform, they think that later is the hell

OAuth is one piece of evidence that confirms this general pattern among online users. Fewer accounts are easier to manage, just give me a click to login button on your site for an account I already have and manage elsewhere
by Jcampuzano2 | 2025-10-04 16:45:46+00:00
Personally I use filter and map (and others like .some, .every .flat and flatmap etc) all the time but I avoid reduce.

filter and map immediately tell me what the purpose of the loops are - filter things and transform things. A for loop does not do this.

To someone familiar with functional programming these are very normal and easier to read and grep than just a loop. In other words filter and map give additional context as to the intent of the loop, a bare for loop does not.

Not to mention this is not abnormal in languages outside of JS, even non-functional ones.

That said Ive seen too many convoluted uses of reduce that I just avoid it out of principle.
by crazygringo | 2025-10-04 16:45:57+00:00
> One of the worst pieces of advice that I ever received was that every function should be unit tested.

Obviously not every function should be -- many are so obvious and straightforward that there's nothing to test -- but every function that does anything vaguely "algorithmic" should be. Unit testing is really important for catching logic errors.

> Instead, write higher level tests close to the client/user facing behaviour that actually give you protection against breaking things unintentionally

Yes, these are good. But they're a different kind of test. There are tests for correctness, and tests that the program runs. You need both.

In fact, sometimes you even need to split up functions smaller than they otherwise would be, just so you can test an inner logic portion independently.
by albedoa | 2025-10-04 16:48:53+00:00
> The fact that you single out .reduce() here is really telling to me. .reduce() definitely has a learning curve to it, but once you're used to it the resulting code is generally much simpler and the immutability of it is much less error-prone. I personally expect JS devs to be on the far side of that learning curve, but there's always a debate about what it's reasonable to expect.

Not only that, but the words that GP uses to single out .reduce() start with:

> I see so much convoluted code with arr.reduce() or many chained arr.map().filter().filter().map()

Which I do not doubt, but the point is diminished when one understands that a mapping of a filtering of a filtering of a mapping is itself a convoluted reduction. Just say that you prefer to read for-statements.
by vunderba | 2025-10-04 16:49:00+00:00
It feels like with the meteoric success of Christopher Nolan's "Batman Begins" in 2005, every studio felt like they had to follow suit and make their movies "dark and edgy".

Personally, I wasn't a huge fan of the Daniel Craig reboot either. We already had a thousand overly serious spy thriller series at that point (Bourne Identity, Mission Impossible, etc.). Give me the almost cartoonishly villainous enemies, the outlandish technological gadgetry, and the punchy one-liners of the original James Bond movies any day.
by _factor | 2025-10-04 16:49:55+00:00
For the record, I have managed to limit advertising for tykes to near 0. Young enough where control over electronics is viable.

As soon as a game pops up, the only unfiltered ad exposure basically, and it’s glue. The bright colors, the subconscious techniques, the hidden waveforms, whatever magic sauce they use to steal attention WORKS.

It’s like seeing a fairy tapping kids on the head and stealing all of their attention as they become droolingly attentive zombies to whatever drivel reserves the sales screen real estate for that time slice.

It is concerningly effective, and I can bet most everyone grew up saturated with it. Bordering on harassment/abuse since it can not be entirely avoided.
by littlestymaar | 2025-10-04 16:49:59+00:00
> all of that "innate knowledge" still fits into under 1 gigabyte of compressed DNA.

Yes, the same way Turing completeness fits in 8bits, which is both perfectly true (see rule 110) and perfectly useless to derive any conclusion about the limitation of innate knowledge.

Similarly, just because you can encode the number Pi in just two bytes (the ASCII for both “p” and “i” letters) it doesn't mean the number contains only two bytes of entropy.
by Wowfunhappy | 2025-10-04 16:50:38+00:00
I don't understand what this has to do with the Intel deprecation. Did Apple recently change something I'm not aware of?

I know that from the start Apple Silicon has required binaries to be signed with _a_ signature, but since that could be an ad-hoc signature this struck me as more of an implementation detail of the binary format than a significant policy shift. Otherwise, as far as I was aware the requirements were the same for Intel and Apple Silicon.

Also, is Homebrew planning to drop support for macOS 26 as soon as macOS 27 comes out in September 2026? I thought they supported the three most recent OS releases, as Apple does.

Edit: I decided to also ask these questions on the Github discussion. Either the maintainer is confused, or I'm confused, and I don't know which it is!
by bigstrat2003 | 2025-10-04 16:51:16+00:00
I found it kind of odd that the author says Rust doesn't support concurrent programming out of the box. He links to another comment which points out you don't need Tokio for async (true enough), but even that aside async isn't the only way to achieve concurrency. Threads are built right into the language, and are easier to use than async. The only time they wouldn't be a good choice is if you anticipate needing to spawn so many threads that it causes resource issues, which very few programs will.
by verdverm | 2025-10-04 16:51:42+00:00
Some interesting points in there you have made.

I run my own PLC read-only mirror and do resolution that way, the main PLC is not hardcoded and is a variable you can configure in the official packages

There is also talk of supporting the did:webvh (or something like that) which addresses the domain loss iirc.

> multiple “resolvers

As an ATProto developer, how many authorities would I have to consult? Where would that list come from and live?

More builders are welcome if you want to work on this problem. I'm working on private data and permissions for ATProto
by lukevp | 2025-10-04 16:51:43+00:00
Have you used windows 11 and macOS 26? They both have malware scanning and throw up alerts or scary dialogs that you have to do cli commands or workarounds to launch unknown apps. I don’t see this as much different than Android requiring you to either root or enable developer options.

I understand this is a controversial position and I’m not in favor of this change, I just want to understand where the real differences are in an impartial way.

Of course Linux is an exception but it is also not widely used by consumers like Android and the other OSes I listed are.
Hackathons aren't enough. Accelerators are too much. So we built Proving Ground
by markbevans101 | 2025-10-04 16:51:51+00:00
I’ve spent years at the edge where startups meet enterprise adoption — helping new tech break into big companies and watching what actually scales.

One thing I kept seeing: hackathons are fun, but too many weekend demos die because no one knows if they’re building something real or fundable.

So we built *Proving Ground* — a 72-hour “startup sprint” for the AI era:

• Build or ship a real feature in 3 days • Test with real users immediately • Judges score on Pull (market demand), Momentum (shipping speed), and Team Fit (domain know-how) • We track what happens next — who keeps building and who raises

Example: teams from recent sprints have already been invited to 500 Global and are raising seed rounds.

Next sprint is Oct 17–19 in the Bay Area. Open to any builder — no invite hoops, just proof. https://lu.ma/startupsprint

Curious what HN thinks: does this solve what hackathons miss? Would you join if you were validating a new AI idea?
by marcosdumay | 2025-10-04 16:51:56+00:00
> due to abundance; ability to form many bonds; bonds that are just durable enough but not too durable

Well, the thing is that all of those are environment-dependent.

We do have data on a somewhat diverse set of environments, and it's enough to confirm what we knew about the flexibility of carbon. But it's not enough to disprove the alternatives.
by acdha | 2025-10-04 16:52:01+00:00
It’s worth thinking about why you’re wrong, because it explains why those comparisons aren’t valid. Modern conservatism is defined by rejecting ideas like objective truth or pluralism which are the core of academia. There’s no way to have conservatives more represented in science when conservatives refuse to allow people who practice science to be part of their movement: you used to be able to find Republicans who wanted to do something about climate change, for example, but anyone who wants to apply scientific principles there now has been purged from the party. Vaccines aren’t quite there yet but it’s trending in that direction and the percentage of doctors who are Republican have been declining since the pandemic.

Contrast that with women in tech or men in nursing and it becomes obvious why the comparison isn’t valid: women want to be good technologists, not to reject the validity of technology or say we should all go back to the Amish lifestyle (that desire is common to senior developers of both genders). Male nurses want to be good nurses, not claiming that their gender means they can commit medical malpractice.
by brookst | 2025-10-04 16:52:02+00:00
Yes. The meta problem is the trend toward “I dont’t like X, and I don’t like Y, therefore X is causing Y” thinking.

It’s always been the reactionary’s argument: immigrants cause crime, inter-racial marriage causes poverty, etc, etc.

The real collapse we’re seeing is the liberal / progressive adoption of these fallacies. Social media causes fascism (nevermind the absence of social media in previous collapses into fascism), etc.

Many of the people rightfully dismayed by trends are unwittingly contributing to the changes they dislike.

The correct answer to “I think social media leads to fascism” is not “let’s ban social media”. The correct answer is “let’s study the problem and see what science says”. Abandoning that is giving up.
by cosmicgadget | 2025-10-04 16:52:27+00:00
The judiciary interprets the law. As I said, you can narrowly say OSC is "official" and "interprets" the law, but it's a deceptive way to describe the situation. Hopefully we'll see another group successully claim standing for being harmed by Hatch Act violations.

An honest way to describe the situation is "the Trump OSC has decided that Trump should investigate Trump and it is unclear if anyone else can sue for relief from a politicized civil service". At the very least "they've put out a statement saying they've changed their interpretation" is far better than the passive voice.
by gruez | 2025-10-04 16:52:41+00:00
Not to mention this doesn't even solve the problem. What's preventing someone from registering and then releasing an app with a similar name to a famous app? Sure, the registration means there's someone you can sue, but it doesn't allow the user to identify the publisher. A "verified publisher" field when you're installing an app would solve both issues (similar to windows[1]), and not require every app developer to register with google.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:User_Account_Control.png
by brianpaul | 2025-10-04 16:52:46+00:00
IIRC, one of the 8-bit Atari magazines had an article describing a similar setup back in the mid/later 80s. Basically, put a photoresistor in a shroud (I used the cap from a Bic pen and some electrical tape), attach it to the dot matrix print head and wire it to the Atari joystick port's analog/paddle input. Place a bright light over the printer. Then the software told the printer to move the print head back and forth while it read the port value. The image quality was terrible but it was a fun project.
by clemens3 | 2025-10-04 16:52:47+00:00
It is interesting to read what you wrote. Some points as a reaction:

"I know that one day I'm going to die". Yes, and most people ignore it and push this insight away. You know who deals with this topic over and over, that is Buddhism. You might be open to investigate what they have to say. The rest of what you wrote also reminds me of what Buddhism has to say.

"I'm completely clueless what I could potentially change while there's still time. And the worst part is, compared to most of humanity, I'm very privileged."

Again, as I understand it, the buddhists think our live as a human is like a very fine boat, very precious. The Buddhists think we needed many lives to get to this point in the Karma circle. Sounds stupid, but just think how long evolution took to create you, how many of your parents and anchestors had to have how much luck, and voila, here you are! Bummer, not? And you know, just for a short time, and then what for. So the Buddhists think, you have kind of an obligation and responsibility, to make good use of this precious boat. They say, yes, it is urgent, not much time left.

For you it is meaning (maybe). For other it is happiness. For others yet something else. What is wrong to spend a whole life about what would or could be meaningful, or maybe there is nothing, or maybe there does not need to be something, or maybe there is something. Nothing to loose, not. Btw, here is a story I heard from Ken McLeod online in a talk:

It goes like this, a sage is sitting on the side of the street, and Alexander the Great comes along with his army. He sees the sage, and asks him, what do you do the whole day? And the Sage says I am contemplating/meditating/do nothing (I forgot the detail), and Alexander shakes his head and says, what's the point of that. And then the sage asks Alexander, and what do you do the whole day? And Alexander says, I am building an empire! And the sage says, but what for?

So if you haven't found meaning for yourself, at least you are honest about it, and maybe you know already what you are looking for.

The above mentioned Ken McLeod has written a book about Buddhism, that puts it into the context of our Western culture. I once gave a copy to a Chinese, and she said after reading it, the concepts are easy to understand, but hard to remember. For me it is the other way around, very counter intuitive to understand. I gave the book someone else too, and when she saw the book she said, "ah, you are a searcher". Maybe I am, and so far I haven't found anything better or a contradiction in it. So that is my best lead so far, maybe you would find it worthwhile to look into this area too (the book is BTW "Wake Up To Your Life", there is also a web site with lot's of transcribed talks: https://unfetteredmind.org/).

(disclaimer: meditation can be also potentially harmfull, as e.g. "terrifying" thoughts could be even more amplified and leading to a real or deeper crisis.)

Anyway, good luck (to everybody).
by FireBeyond | 2025-10-04 16:53:07+00:00
Hah, yes. In Australia when I was growing up there was a program called Work for the Dole (Unemployment) after you had been unemployed for a while. During the dotcom era, that was me. There was one program that was tech and web development skills. I went to a church twice a week (the organization running the program wasn't the church, they just rented rooms), and we poked at shitty old computers while I tried to help the staff figure out how to get Dreamweaver running on them (I knew more than the staff) in a way that was basically trying not to break the licensing - since they'd only bought one copy for the entire classroom. I knew more than the staff, the computers were decrepit, etc., and we were stuffed in the back room of a church.

I got to meet the "org executives" (it was really only the two of them, grifting, in the entire org) who were collecting a nice fat government check per person enrolled in their program. They came by to see how we were doing, and were there for less than 15 minutes. Two ladies in their 50s who were more interested in talking about how excited they were to be going off to pick up their new company cars after lunch, matching Jaguar XJs.
by lukevp | 2025-10-04 16:53:18+00:00
But they don’t verify each app in this case, just the developer… you get verified before you even tell them what type of app you have.

Sure, it’s possible they could retroactively ban your app, but they could do that without signing too. Just ban com.anonymous.newpipe or whatever the package name is. The signing doesn’t really change this.
by akamoonknight | 2025-10-04 16:54:10+00:00
Ah, that's a fancy trick! I remember many a time making Linux real angry with my PCIe fiddling. I believe in the end we got Partial Reconfiguration set up, where the PCIe portion of the device would not be reprogrammed but we could reload the rest. It was definitely a trade off though in terms of layout planning and space reservation.
by dheera | 2025-10-04 16:54:23+00:00
If you fold A4 in half you get A5, and if you double up A4 you get A3. They are all the same exact proportions.

US sizes don't work like that; the closest thing to A3 here doesn't have the same proportions as the closest thing to A4. Which absolutely sucks if you are designing a poster and need to make it bigger or smaller.

With international A sizes you can reuse the same design for any size. That's why I like them.
by finaard | 2025-10-04 16:54:35+00:00
Same as the one earlier in the thread: Build servers, nicely loaded. A build generates a ridiculous amount of writes for stuff that just gets thrown out after the build.

We actually did try with SSDs about 15 years ago, and had a lot of dead SSDs in a very short time. After that we went for estimating data written, it's cheaper. While SSD durability increased a lot since then everything else got faster as well - so we'd have SSDs last a bit longer now (back then it was a weekly thing), but still nowhere near where it'd be a sensible thing to do.
by pjmlp | 2025-10-04 16:55:16+00:00
As someone that used GNOME 1.0, was contributor to Gtkmm for a brief moment, the fact that GNOME 3.0 needs so many extensions, versus GNOME 1.0 - 2.0 default experience, and its dependency on JavaScript already rules it out for me.

Indeed, Ubuntu has to ship additional GNOME extensions for basic features Unity already offered, and they didn't want a revolt when decided to drop Unity.