MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by marcosdumay | 2025-10-04 16:30:38+00:00
It's reasonably strong, so that on practice you can trust it to verify the properties it verifies. (Though, it's not completely flawless in theory.)

It's also static, so your types declarations will replace tests.

But it's extremely inexpressive, so you can declare very few properties, and so it will replace very few tests.

And it's inflexible, so it will get on your way all the time while you program.

Anyway, I can almost guarantee you the GP wasn't talking about Java.
by oldandboring | 2025-10-04 16:30:41+00:00
The pitch clock is undoubtedly the most impactful of the changes made recently to speed up the game. However, other changes were implemented alongside it that have contributed in meaningful ways:

- Limit on the number of times per plate appearance a pitcher can "disengage" by stepping off/calling time or making a pickoff move.

- Limit on the number of times per plate appearance a batter can "disengage" by stepping out/calling time.

- Minimum of 3 batters must be faced by an incoming relief pitcher (or must finish the half-inning)

- Limit on the number of mound visits per game

- Larger bases

- Elimination (mostly) of the defensive "shift"

- Team at bat starts with an automatic "ghost" runner on 2nd base in extra innings
by giantrobot | 2025-10-04 16:30:51+00:00
I for one love terrible out of the box experiences and have to magically know what extensions are good and will solve whatever problems I have with the DE. It's so freeing to spend all my time hunting down extensions and and keeping them updated or magically have them break when the DE updates. Even better is when all these extensions aren't handled by the distros' package manager!
by buran77 | 2025-10-04 16:31:06+00:00
> these are pretty well defined quantities, just hard to measure.

They are "defined" conceptually, in words, not in physical quantities. It assumes we can assign a known value to any of that when we don't and likely never will. It's like saying "Let X answer the unanswerable question. X is the answer".

> at no point does it assume a planet must be in the Goldilocks zone

You could say it implies it with fl.

> Edit: the parent post has been edited substantially after I replied.

Only for legibility.
by yjftsjthsd-h | 2025-10-04 16:32:16+00:00
> I might be wrong, but I have the feeling that this is a very different scenario, if only because the potential for becoming filthy rich by selling printer parts seems slim. I believe they genuinely want to empower users, without working for free for some industrial company that could just exploit the design without contributing anything back.

And yet, the one thing they've done is ensured that nobody can ever compete with them commercially. Even if we were to accept that making and selling the thing isn't contributing (I disagree), they could just use a share-alike license so that any improvements are also released back to the community. Heck, in that situation the original folks could take 3rd party improvements and sell them. But they didn't. I lack your optimism; I think if someone was trying to just make money and milk customers this is exactly how it would look.

> Empowering the user meets the definition of open source for me.

> I wish we would not be so harsh against good-spirited creators because they miss to check all the boxes of the official definition of open source (tm).

Yeah, the problem is exactly that this hurts users. Sure, individual DIY-savvy folks can replace parts or even make improvements, but it can never scale up. It's like saying that Windows is an open system because users can install programs that modify how it works a bit... so long as they never sell those improvements. It intentionally cripples the ecosystem. (I probably argued this better at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45470111 )
by verdverm | 2025-10-04 16:32:55+00:00
> keeping interesting content on a platform

> instead of migrating the peer group over to a new platform every couple of years

> I appreciate and respect the technical efforts behind atproto, but yet I can‘t see that it solves the problem described above.

If I am correctly reading backwards from "does atproto solve this core problem I see" ...

ATProto is a fabric where your data lives and Bluesky is just one app that sits on top of this. Your network and data stays with you if you move platforms or try out completely different apps. Same account, same data, same social graph (if you want to reuse it for other apps or not). Similarly, other apps can access all or some of your data (if you let them), so you don't have to start from scratch and they can provide more interesting content for new to them users (but not new to atproto)

In this sense, as people try out and move around different apps, they don't lose things. Users can even be on different apps, but using the same underlying data, transparent to them. This is called the "credible exit" around the atmosphere (atproto ecosystem nickname) and means (1) you can leave a bad company without them preventing you from taking your data (2) enables real competition in social apps, re: the aforementioned features.
by HarHarVeryFunny | 2025-10-04 16:33:45+00:00
I guess it depends what question are we trying to ask. It may well be that there is no other intelligent life close enough to us, or coexisting with us in time, that we will ever be aware of it, but yet the universe may still be teeming with intelligent life.

In either case it's a statistical question of how common is life, and intelligent life, but of course there's the human interest in potential contact with another intelligent life form.
by MarkMarine | 2025-10-04 16:34:30+00:00
One of my favorite quotes: “ Only a crisis—actual or perceived—produces real change. When that crisis occurs, the actions that are taken depend on the ideas that are lying around. That, I believe, is our basic function: to develop alternatives to existing policies, to keep them alive and available until the politically impossible becomes politically inevitable.” - Milton Friedman

I’ve found writing 1 pagers and technical documents that I can circulate, and then re-reference when there is a crisis is the way to have my ideas floating around at the time. I’ve had some success driving the architecture I want iteratively, slowly progressing towards my goals by building consensus but I’ve also been owned by VPs and directors that are much better at politics than I am. Having the library of 1 pagers, sending them around so they are latently in the air, and waiting for the impetus to execute on that idea has been much more successful.
by vunderba | 2025-10-04 16:34:36+00:00
As much as I can't stand censorship / Amazon / etc., has anyone actually taken the time to vet this story before voicing their outrage?

A cursory search online reveals only a single source [1]. Additionally searching on Amazon Prime for Bond movies shows PLENTY of poster/cover art with Bond holding his quintessential Walther PPK including Dr. No [2] which was mentioned in the article.

So unless this was leaked by an intern or maybe its being AB tested in various regions, this seems like a big fat nothing. I mean why single out James Bond? Why not Terminator, Predator... basically every Schwarzenegger movie in existence with the exception of Jingle All the Way.

[1] https://www.mi6-hq.com/sections/articles/amazon-prime-2025-r...

[2] https://www.amazon.com/dp/B009GEPRZE
by zahlman | 2025-10-04 16:35:09+00:00
I think your assessment of what's "the right/wrong" syntax is fair. But the transition you describe takes a long time, even now that the community has figured out a "deprecation cycle" process that seems satisfactory (i.e. won't lead to another Python 3.0 situation).

> All which authors of old code would have to do is run a provided fix script in the root directory of their code.

As I recall, `lib2to3` didn't do a lot to ease tensions. And `six` is still absurdly popular, mainly thanks to `python-dateutil` still attempting to support 2.7.
by Aerbil313 | 2025-10-04 16:35:31+00:00
I’ll never understand this sentiment expressed online that Liquid Glass is bad design.

After reading how awful it is on HN, I upgraded to see it for myself. After some pondering it was obvious why Apple went with this design.

Today’s apps’ problem is every app has its own UI language, and users have to first learn that before being able to use an app. Apple recognized this. If you can’t see why it’s a problem, try to teach your mom or grandma how to use a new app.

To design a unified UI framework, you need a lot of things: common elements (e.g. date picker), typography (fonts, text styling), iconography (the same icon in every app for the Share button), etc. Both Apple annd Android vendors already have UI frameworks dictating these for native apps today.

The hard problem that remained unsolved until Liquid Glass is these UI toolkits can’t dictate a color for interactive elements, because every other app has its own, different color scheme. Any color you pick will inevitably look out of place in some apps. The answer here is, unsurprisingly, transparent elements.

But there is historically a huge issue with transparent elements, a hard problem where many previous attempts have failed: how can you make a transparent element (e.g a button) still be recognizable on various content?

Apple’s answer here works beautifully: make the controls appear floating an inch over the content, by mimicking the properties of the two most familiar physical transparent objects - water and glass.
by ben_w | 2025-10-04 16:35:38+00:00
Even with much better AI than today*, a human doctor is still a second opinion — and in a better way that just asking the AI twice or even asking two different models.

Hosted AI with specific version numbers are, by corporate preference, memetic monocultures: even when they're generally better, the failures are correlated.

* despite how generally impressed I am by SOTA models, I still suspect this story has been cherry-picking successes
by Juliate | 2025-10-04 16:36:26+00:00
The NFT idea was driven, pushed by people that did not practice, rely on, neither understood, what art is, and what art does.

Those came from tech, from finance, from speculative finance.

And that it got some temporary success in some specific art business circles is but a confirmation of that.

And that's quite the same phenomenon we see today with generative AI. Interestingly, this time, rather than trying to weaponise copyright for their tech, they weaponise their tech against copyright.

And it's the very same individuals at the top of the money chain, that invested massively in both techs.
by bix6 | 2025-10-04 16:36:43+00:00
> There's also plenty of argument to be made that it's already here

Given you start with that I would say yes the /s is needed.

A 4 year old isn’t statistically predicting the next word to say; its intelligence is very different from an LLM. Calling an LLM “intelligent” seems more marketing than fact based.
by pragmatic | 2025-10-04 16:36:50+00:00
Everything in that data center is depreciating as soon as they turn on the power.

AC, ups, generators not to mention the severs.

That's the thing with fiber it was still useful. The cards at either end are easy to add, waaaayyy cheaper and higher perf (they're were no cards on end of dark lines) 15 years later.
by posix86 | 2025-10-04 16:36:51+00:00
The biggest political capital that you can build up is your technical understanding & skills. But they are only useful insofar as you put them into the context of the broader company strategy. Giving appropriate advice, and delivering, in the interest of the company, will give you capital, i.e., people listening to you & relying on you, trusting you, which gives you power to steer. Preparing contingency plans & pitching then, then executing them, is the best way.
by bradlys | 2025-10-04 16:37:04+00:00
To flesh out things to where you could actually make a reasonable pitch with things like realistic time estimates and documents that would be useful to read then you'd have to have already done it, it'd be trivial, or you apparently have plenty of spare time to do serious spikes in your day to day. You'd also have to have the spare time to update these project ideas as the months pass, the product and codebase changes, etc.

I'm often convinced people extrapolate their insane luck with teams+companies and assume every other company/team can replicate their results. I have a hard time finding people in high level positions who give the slightest of fucks about engineering focused tasks but I am someone who works on product teams. The target goal is always about making money - not saving money or improving velocity.
by bill_joy_fanboy | 2025-10-04 16:37:18+00:00
Well, that's nice that you feel that way. But, you don't get to decide what people "deserve" or what "should" happen.

I happen to disagree. I think these crimes (and many others) should follow you more or less permanently.

My opinions on what "should" be the case have just as much validity as yours.

Please be self aware when you are making baseless moral claims.
by crazygringo | 2025-10-04 16:37:50+00:00
Thank you, that's very helpful.

I'm still left wondering how you prevent the problem of somebody creating hundreds of accounts to upvote all their own posts.

I see how the labelers work for content, but I don't see anything about user reputation. So I'm still struggling to understand what the protections are against bots? I'm struggling to understand how upvote/recommendation numbers can be trusted at all, when you want to see what's liked across the whole network and not just by your friends, but without it all being spam likes.

>> can fake their own data

> Fake can be seen subjectively here, if it's my data and I can put anything I want in there, what is fake about it?

So it seems like the hashes (cid) are a big help, thank you. Is there anything preventing you from backdating things? Making it look like you said something or posted a photo of something last month that you didn't actually until just now? Because that seems like the other big category of content faking.
by madaxe_again | 2025-10-04 16:38:38+00:00
Many AI startups around LLMs are going to crash and burn.

This is because many people have mistaken LLMs for AI, when they’re just a small subset of the technology - and this has driven myopic focus in a lot of development, and has lead to naive investors placing bets on golden dog turds.

I disagree on AI as a whole, however - as unlike previous technologies this one can self-ratchet and bootstrap. ML designed chips, ML designed models, and around you go until god pops out the exit chute.
by hungryhobbit | 2025-10-04 16:38:46+00:00
It only became obvious at the end that the whole (WAY too long) article was just a giant troll to promote the author's personal pet technology (HTMLX). But it was a highly disingenuous one, because (as the poster above noted) it was giant straw man, not a legit critique.

I felt cheated just by having read the article: I'm all for a long and winding article that has something to say, but this one was telling a bad joke for WAY, WAY too many paragraphs.
by bschup | 2025-10-04 16:38:55+00:00
Certainly, we use networks on FPGA at FNAL for inference on LHC/CMS high energy physics results. There are also cases involving microsecond control of dynamical systems. https://fastmachinelearning.org/hls4ml/ https://indico.cern.ch/event/797510/contributions/3313676/at... https://cdrdv2-public.intel.com/833277/deploying-tinyml-fpga... https://ml4physicalsciences.github.io/2019/files/NeurIPS_ML4...
by toast0 | 2025-10-04 16:39:02+00:00
> You don't see it much at the game

I haven't paid enough attention at baseball games. At hockey games, if you can see the scorekeeper, they have a lamp at the glass that will come on during a stopage to let the refs know it's time for a commercial (if you watch for this, you can get a jump on the crowd if you need a bathroom break or refreshments). You can usually predict a commercial timeout, they've got guidelines that are pretty consistently applied [1]

[1] https://nhlofficials.com/know-the-rules/week-20-need-a-break... search for "Commercial’s time-outs should be taken at the first whistle"
by lkrubner | 2025-10-04 16:39:14+00:00
"Ordinary people—who watched their rent, groceries, and gas bills skyrocket—saw a profession more invested in protecting Democratic policy narratives than in telling the truth. The result is a self-inflicted torching of trust."

This post is ridiculously partisan. The head of the Fed was Republican, the majority of the Fed has always been Republican, the money-printing response to the Covid-19 pandemic began in 2020 when the President was a Republican, the majority of all economists are Republican, but somehow this writer blames this on Democrats? The result is a self-inflicted torching of trust.
by xp84 | 2025-10-04 16:39:15+00:00
I’m not on Obamacare, so my premiums aren’t going up. Obamacare is also pretty terrible, since those plans always have worse networks than private insurance since those plans have shitty reimbursement rates. Anyone who can avoid Obamacare plans avoids them, and is smart to do so.

One reason I don’t support the DNC is because Obamacare is such a shitty and compromised system, designed to help insurance companies maximize their profits. Since the Democrats can’t convince anyone to vote for them because they are obsessed with draping themselves in the mantles of unpopular culture war issues, they have proven unable to get the kind of power it would take to pass even a public option, let alone an “NHS.”

I don’t support the GOP, of course, because instead of coming up with a better alternative or an overhaul, they just fuck around with it and try to make it worse and more expensive.

Both sides are idiots here.
by yjftsjthsd-h | 2025-10-04 16:40:22+00:00
> There are certainly advantages to the users but I guess there can also be risks for the creators (thus also ultimately for users).

No, I think the downsides are all to the creators. Consider the case if the creators release under an actual open source share-alike license: They ship, they release the source, 3rd parties clone it. The original creators lose money because now they have actual competition. Users, though? They get more options, lower prices, and reliability in the form of replacements if the original creators stop selling.

> Isn't the rPI a counter-example, as a design that is not 100% legally copyable yet still open enough to inspire a lot of similar projects in this area?

How so? The pi would have clones no matter how open it was. Actually I think it's the other way: The way the pi remains so proprietary is actively unhelpful to users, because the lack of specs makes it hard to port new operating systems to the hardware.

> If there is a sure way to reach a world of open design and user freedom, I sure don't know what it is.

Use an actual open source license ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-source_hardware#Licenses ). This isn't complicated.
by pjmlp | 2025-10-04 16:40:37+00:00
Apple used to care before Swift, because Objective-C unlike C++, is a full superset from C.

Most of the work going into LLVM ecosystem is directly into LLVM tooling itself, clang was started by Apple, and Google picked up on it.

Nowadays they aren't as interested, given Swift, C++ on Apple platforms is mostly for MSL (C++14 baseline) and driver frameworks (also a C++ subset), Google went their own way after the ABI drama, and they care about what fits into their C++ style guide.

I know Intel is one of the companies that picked up some of the work, yet other compiler vendors that replaced their proprietary forks with clang don't seem that eager to contribute upstream, other than LLVM backends for their platforms.

Such is the wonders of Apache 2.0 license.
by brookst | 2025-10-04 16:40:59+00:00
Expand the thinking to include impact on developing countries, the poor, minority groups who have few people like themselves in their local area, etc.

I’ll grant that for comparatively wealthy, privileged people who were always going to have an easy time (which frankly include me), the internet has been a mixed bag.

But for the kids growing up in comparatively poor countries, who can now access all of the world’s information, entertainment, and economy.. I think it’s a pretty clear win.

I expect AI will be similar: perhaps not a huge boon to the best off, but a substantial improvement for most people in the world. Even if we can sit back and say “oh, but they also get misinformation and lower quality YouTube content”
by vacuity | 2025-10-04 16:42:02+00:00
Fully agree with you. The feature needs to be done right, and an overhaul like the storage proposal is probably necessary. I think the allocator feature is one of those features that Rust historically had leeway on, because it's still relatively new, but now a bright path for the years (decades) ahead is crucial. Unstable-but-implemented-and-maybe-stabilizing is still better than stable-but-sucks-forever.
by softwaredoug | 2025-10-04 16:42:19+00:00
IMO the best you can do:

- Ship often to prod (don’t do theoretical work).

- Ship wins (as defined by generally acceptable metrics.)

- Have someone in management or a PM who is good at selling your wins

Even here, though, you will run into problems. There is always a new VP or leader looking to make an impact. Because you maintain the current systems your team is engaging in WrongThink and new VP has shiny new RightThink (AI, etc). As soon as your code hits prod you have “legacy” code.

New VP can make promises of future, theoretical riches that you can’t compete with, as you maintain the boring, current reality. Reality is not sexy or interesting. You’re in the old guard now.

A lot simply boils down to patronage. Making your higher up VP look successful and being in a position to move with them to their new company.
by add-sub-mul-div | 2025-10-04 16:43:03+00:00
The best concert I ever saw was one I only knew about from a TV commercial.

And I realized after become aggressive about skipping all commercials that I'm no longer seeing movies other than the most mainstream franchise ones that it's impossible not to learn about. I used to come across trailers for movies and now I never do.

As with all things, the far extremist take (advertising is a cancer) is misguided.

Advertising is information. We're smart adults and can separate the facts (a new pizza place opened in town) from the bias (it's the best pizza place in town!)