MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by bigstrat2003 | 2025-10-05 15:50:33+00:00
IPv6 works just fine. I'm by no means a talented network engineer (I'm not even a network engineer at all), but it's really easy to set up a network to have dual-stack v4 and v6. While it's technically more work, it's more work on the magnitude of spending two hours rather than one hour on setting up the network. Not exactly a meaningful increase in how much work it took.

As for "why", because I don't have to faff about with NAT or port forwarding, both of which are terrible. I just put addresses into a AAAA record and open a firewall rule, the way it should be. Meanwhile with v4 I have to port forward all web traffic to one server, then reverse proxy it to its final destination. It's more complicated and fragile to set up, whereas v6 is simple and pleasant to work with.
by Herring | 2025-10-05 15:50:54+00:00
“A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.”

― Robert A. Heinlein

(It's a matter of opinion)
by woooooo | 2025-10-05 15:50:59+00:00
Leetcode was always a skill mostly practiced for interviews though, right? Arguably its a better signal now in the era of vibecoding that someone can do it themselves if they have to. It used to be "yeah of course I'm responsible in my job, I use a library for this stuff". But in this era, maybe performative leetcode has more value as a signal that you can really guide the AI.
by chermi | 2025-10-05 15:51:00+00:00
That's self-fulfilling. Solar was expensive. Then they built a lot of them, they got cheaper (+ better tech obviously). We know basically nothing about the learning curve of nuclear because we haven't met the conditions for the learning curve to apply, except maybe in China, where it seems to hold.

I just don't understand why everyone is so confident that nuclear power is the one thing that doesn't get cheaper with better technology and scale. Everything that is built is old tech, and, except in China and south Korea, built so rarely that the workforce is basically brand new every time. Of course they're expensive(in the West), they're one-off large engineering projects. All evidence points toward China, south Korea being able to do it cheaper and faster, so we should look there when there's sufficient (trustworthiness and quantity) data to test scaling laws. All signs point to cheaper and faster, but even then, the numbers of builds are relatively small, so you'd expect scaling gains to be modest. One of the main points of SMRs is to harness the effects of large numbers.

Why not at least try? Why are we so confident it will fail before even trying with modern designs?
by raincole | 2025-10-05 15:51:22+00:00
The exact same argument can be made for people who claiming AI would make us dumber:

If they lived in an earlier time, they'd be worrying about the rise of google, the internet, tv, radio... were going to make people stop using their brains. Socrates believed writing was going to make people stop memorizing stuff.

I'm not a doomsayer who thinks the world is on the edge of collapsing. But I do think the issues I listed are much more 'real' than AI making people stop thinking. (Including the birth rate one - yeah, I'm well aware that many people think it's a good thing. As someone whose mother worked at a nursing home, in a country with TFR of 0.78, I just don't agree with them. I believe people hugely underestimate the manpower needed to take care of the elderly and disabled.)
by toasterlovin | 2025-10-05 15:51:57+00:00
It’s a completely legitimate question. It’s the same moral consideration behind whether drugs and alcohol should be legal. Banning them is good for people who can’t use them responsibly, but reduces the freedom of people who can. Given that we’ve flip flopped on the legality of alcohol, cannabis, and sports betting in the last 100ish years, it’s clear there is ambiguity about what is the best tradeoff.
by chrischen | 2025-10-05 15:52:45+00:00
When I say ideas i'm talking in the context of programming... I'm not talking about "I got a great idea for a new social network" and the AI just wrote some spaghetti code for it. When I have the AI write low level code it's stuff like filling out a function implementation of which I already defined high level type classes for... I can focus on high level abstractions, whereas the AI can iterate in the most statistically sensible way to fill in the easy blanks.
by b00ty4breakfast | 2025-10-05 15:53:19+00:00
The chicken farmer necessarily seeks out the chickens that lay the most eggs, because that's how he makes his living. In an economy that incentivizes the highest profit-margins, this exploitation becomes intrinsic to the operation of a gambling establishment sans regulations that prevent it.

Games of chance and friendly wagers amongst friends may not, in themselves be immoral or harmful but gambling as an organized business activity is absolutely harmful
by gavmor | 2025-10-05 15:53:54+00:00
It's a simple, timeless, inescapable law of the universe that failures, while potentially damaging, are acceptable risks. The Pareto principle suggests that addressing only the most critical 20% of issues issues yields a disproportionate 80% of the benefits, while the rest of the big bounties yield diminishing marginal returns.

We're seeing bugs in bigger slices because technology is, overall, a bigger pie. Full of bugs. The bigger the pie, the easier it is to eat around them.

Another principle at play might be "induced demand," most notoriously illustrated by widening highways, but might just as well apply to the widening of RAM.

Are we profligate consumers of our rareified, finite computing substrate? Perhaps, but the Maximum Power Transfer Theorem suggests that anything less than 50% waste heat would slow us down. What's the rush? That's above my pay grade.

I guess what I'm saying is that I don't see any sort of moral, procedural, or ideological decay at fault.

In my circles, QA is still very much a thing, only "shifted left" for tighter integration into CI/CD.

Edit: It's also worth reflecting on "The Mess We're In."[0] Approaches that avoid or mitigate the pitfalls common to writing software must be taught or rediscovered in every generation, or else wallow in the obscure quadrant of unknown-unknowns.

0. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=lKXe3HUG2l4
by Rochus | 2025-10-05 15:53:56+00:00
> Go doesn't belong in this discussion.its a better java, c#, python and not much more. It doesn't work for 24/7 or for performance sensitive applications.

The claim is factually backwards. Go significantly outperforms Java, C#, and Python (~10x faster than Python, lower memory usage than C#), and runs successfully in countless 24/7 production systems including high-throughput APIs and distributed services.

The actual valid concern, which made me question its suitability, is that Go wouldn't be appropriate for TigerBeetle's specific real-time requirements. TigerBeetle is a financial transaction database requiring deterministic, predictable microsecond-level latencies with strict timestamp ordering across a distributed consensus protocol. Go's garbage collector introduces unpredictable pauses that would likely violate these hard real-time guarantees.
by bamboozled | 2025-10-05 15:53:56+00:00
It's not the article is about though, you're doing all this "engineering" to have success with the "AI". You're not really "depending on it", which is more in the spirit of the article and what I found myself starting to do. At some point you think , I'll either do it myself, or use "AI", at which point you will start to become dependent on it.
Show HN: Scout QA – Vibe testing for vibe coding
by htieu | 2025-10-05 15:54:24+00:00
Hey HN! I'm Huy, leading product at Katalon in Vietnam. We built Scout QA because the testing tools we had weren't keeping up with how fast we (and our users) are shipping with AI coding tools. The problem: When you're using Cursor, Replit, or Lovable to generate entire features in minutes, traditional test automation feels backwards. You'd spend more time writing Selenium scripts than it took to build the feature. Scout takes a different approach. You give it a URL, and it uses AWS Bedrock AgentCore with Amazon Nova Act to figure out what to test. It explores your app, generates checks automatically, and gives you Traffic Light Reports (red/yellow/green) showing what works. When something breaks, it suggests prompts you can feed back to your AI coding tool to fix it. We're using it internally on our own AI-generated features and it's caught several regressions we would have missed. Still early—there are definitely edge cases where it gets confused, and we're working on better context awareness. We launched with a freemium model. Magic link auth gets you started in about 30 seconds. Technical folks: We're especially interested in feedback on our approach to autonomous test generation. Are we thinking about this problem the right way? Happy to answer questions about the architecture, our reasoning model, or why we think testing needs to evolve for the AI-native development era.
by 1718627440 | 2025-10-05 15:54:26+00:00
I just can't comprehend how people can accept that. I mean sure you can use your handheld computer, but when I wouldn't know where I am and what I need to do to go to where I intend to be, I would feel very alone, lost and abandoned, like being Napoleon on Elba. In a completely foreign city, often I just look at a map before the journey for the general direction and then just keep running, without thinking much. That works quite well, because street design is actually logical and where it isn't there are signs. I'm surprised that you often wouldn't even need a map; because you just need to look at the signs, they will tell you.
by DiscourseFan | 2025-10-05 15:56:23+00:00
I mean hard work has never made anyone wealthy, it usually makes someone else wealthy. What makes you wealthy is being good at negotiation and intepersonal skills, family connections, and luck. And, of course, a touch or genius—there’s a reason that some of the wealthiest people in tech are also sometimes the most brilliant. Somebody who figures out and properly leverages a labor saving technique, even if it seems obvious afterwards, will become wealthy in most circumstances; someone who had their finger on the pulse of a market, whether it is art, fashion, or the S&P 500, can become wealthy by making the right investments and sales. But hard work? Nobody ever became wealthy by working in a coal mine 12 hours a day, nobody ever became wealthy spending hours and hours meticulously and painstakingly setting up a script that could’ve been prompted out in under 5 minutes. Wealth is something that always involves a level of risk and chance, that’s why sports betting is so enticing, because it operates on the same principles as the rest of the market, even though, clearly, like in a casino, the house always gets its cut. But there are many people who live comfortably just playing poker 3 to 4 times a week, and their wealth is no accident.
by weavejester | 2025-10-05 15:56:25+00:00
>> "it's the duty of every American to disobey unjust laws..."

> This is a terrible assertion. The subjectivity of what is just or unjust would lead to overwhelming violent lawlessness if this were true. Thankfully, we have no such duty.

The United States was founded by people defying unjust tax laws. It wouldn't exist as a country if its people had quietly accepted British law. The idea that it's the duty of Americans to disobey unjust laws is very much in line with its founding.

And when we look to history, the people who advanced freedoms and civil rights, the people we really remember - a great many of them were lawbreakers. Mahatma Gandhi was arrested for defying the British salt tax and colonial rule. Nelson Mandela was arrested for opposing apartheid. Martin Luther King Jr was arrested for breaking segregation laws and marching without a permit. Every person who signed the US Declaration of Independence was committing treason against the British crown.
by IgorPartola | 2025-10-05 15:56:33+00:00
You can host stuff on your network that is accessible outside of it without port forwarding.

You can have zero configuration address discovery in a way that is simpler than IPv4.

You don’t need to worry about what happens when you get to over 200 devices on your local network (not unheard of in at home networks when you start adding IoT devices.

You can have stable addresses across ISPs if you bring your own prefix or use a tunnel.

You save money by not renting IPv4 addresses.

You don’t get as easily blacklisted for email delivery since you dot. Share a /24 with a bunch of spammers.

This is before you get into P2P networking without having to rely on a third party relay.
by Theodores | 2025-10-05 15:56:41+00:00
I imagine that a massive mammoth would require the whole village to bring to the ground and back to the village. Conversely, the whole village isn't needed if it is just chicken on the menu tonight. Hence, I would argue that you need a relatively complex society if dinner is mega fauna.

I also don't entirely follow your point that goes from 'backbreaking work' to 'sedentary lifestyle'. The latter only happened in the post war years when we worked out how to have all of the energy we need on tap. Before then, life was hard, albeit not for everyone since we have hierarchies.
by Sesse__ | 2025-10-05 15:56:51+00:00
I never understood why they couldn't just include a movmskb instruction to begin with. It's massively useful for integer tasks, not expensive to implement as far as I know, and the vshrn+mov trick often requires an extra instruction either in front or after (in addition to just being, well, pretty obscure).

NEON in general is a bit sad, really; it's built around the idea of being implementable with a 64-bit ALU, and it shows. And SVE support is pretty much non-existent on the client.
by AndrewKemendo | 2025-10-05 15:56:54+00:00
The late quaternary megafauna crash is well documented with human hunting pointed to as one of a few causes:

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11895740/

I wrote about its impacts on society here:

https://kemendo.com/Myth-of-Scarcity.html

Previously discussed: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39569747

My argument (which I need to update) is that it was the primary catalyst for society to create the system of private property at scale.

However the roots of ritual society are more likely to be centered around the first sex strike around 70,000 BC, first proposed by Chris Knight in his 1991 book “Blood Relations”

http://www.chrisknight.co.uk/category/menstruation/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_strike

The megafauna crash around 50,000BC then catalyzed the expansion of what was then a novel concept, of ritualized transaction, around more sedentary practices eventually leading to agriculture around 13000BC
by bitpush | 2025-10-05 15:57:00+00:00
It works for hardware, because that's the only way to do it. There's no 2 populations for hardware. All decisions are one way doors.

Software must use feedback, otherwise you'll end up with duds like Camera Control, 3D touch, and .. Apple Maps (1.0).

Apple doesnt have that culture, and it shows in their software.
by Razengan | 2025-10-05 15:57:19+00:00
Since this is inevitably going to come up during any mention of Jobs:

Why does Linus Torvalds get a pass, even admired (like in this thread right here), for OPENLY being an extremely vitriolic f*ker, and continuing to be so even after being called out for it to his face in interviews/questions from the audience, but Steve Jobs still gets shade for allegedly being an asshole based on mostly hearsay long after his death?

Telling people to be aborted, outright insulting them in various ways, I have to keep making sure I'm not reading 4chan instead of the Linux mailing list. I doubt Jobs ever even came close to that.

People give Linus a pass for literally the same reasons that Jobs had to be an "asshole" for: "Linux is his baby" "No one else is suited to lead" etc
by firefoxd | 2025-10-05 15:57:32+00:00
One part of his legacy that will forever be misunderstood is that being brutally honest, being demanding, being abrasive is a trait that only translates to success when you are at the top [0]. Countless mid level managers believe it is the only way to lead.

> For Steve Jobs, it's not that being an asshole was his secret sauce. It's that his unique position allowed him to survive the downsides of his personality.

[0]: https://idiallo.com/blog/you-cant-be-an-asshole-as-a-manager
by adriand | 2025-10-05 15:57:36+00:00
I’m genuinely curious to what extent the hardships younger people face economically are related to wasting huge amounts of time on screens. The average Gen Z person spends nine hours per day on screens. The average 18-24 year old American spends more than three hours per day just on social media.

I recognize all the various societal and structural factors that disadvantage younger people. At the same time, people have agency. When I was in my early twenties (twenty years ago) my job was software development and my primary hobby was…software development. I was constantly improving my craft, primarily just because I loved it. Many of the people I worked with were the same.

It is, of course, not entirely fair to criticize younger people given that there are teams of psychologists working to make these products as addictive as possible. So perhaps we older people need to do something about it. Yes, I sound old AF: “kids, get off your phones and do something useful!” Yes, I say this to my own kids, with little discernible efficacy. But I honestly wonder what you all think of this. Do I have a point or is this just victim blaming?
by delopsu | 2025-10-05 15:57:42+00:00
Thank you for trying it and for the feedback! Glad you liked it!

> start with just printable ASCII characters in the brush

Yes. I started like this. But then set these fancy characters by default to show the capabilities, because those who are familiar with the concept know the possibilities, but those who don't know could think that it's limited and not notice wide limits.
by patrakov | 2025-10-05 15:58:33+00:00
Yes - see https://www.reddit.com/r/ipv6/comments/1nf3ytq/how_do_i_comp...

I could not escalate this inside Globe Telecom (no way to reach engineers that understand what a "peering issue" is), and Level3 (the transit provider where all failed traceroutes were going through) did not respond to emails.

Thankfully, it's mostly fixed now - Level3 is no longer the last successful hop on any of the traceroutes. The only failing link is with Evoluhost, and the problem has been traced to a routing loop involving 2001:fe0:4775:1c0::1 inside Globe (that I have no way to complain about).

Today's situation: https://i.ping.pe/j/9/img_j99kbqkn.png
by JumpCrisscross | 2025-10-05 15:58:56+00:00
> Can’t say the author’s fixation on reading long texts resonates with me

It’s an attention and working memory test.

I don’t think I’ve ever prided myself on focus. But signing off social media ten years ago has absolutely left me in a competitive place when it comes to deep thinking, and that’s not because I’ve gotten better at it.

> It wasn’t practical to convey knowledge in a short form previously because printing and distributing a blog post worth of info was too expensive

This is entirely ahistoric. Pamphlets and books published in volumes, where each volume would today be a chapter, was the norm. The novel is a modern invention.
by patcon | 2025-10-05 15:59:07+00:00
First off: thanks for sharing how you experience your protective instincts. I can feel your love for your kid

With that said --

Wha... your and my reads are so different... I hear that as: One lived in the real world that most normal unchosen people experience, and the other had means to avoid said world?

"Abuse" feels strong, bc putting the select (usually wealthy) kids in the safest place and not choosing responsibility/stake in remediating the larger shared experience, that feels like the larger "condemnation to abuse" to me.

I'm a pretty hardcore collectivist though, and I understand that's not everyone's value system *shrug*
by asa400 | 2025-10-05 15:59:21+00:00
I’ve often wondered why forums never took off at any of the companies I’ve worked at. Has anyone else worked at companies that had forums?

All I worked at had email and chat, and some had wikis, but never forums, despite having crucial advantages over email (anyone who joins later can search them) and wikis (they’re conversations rather than mutable, outdated documents) and chat (they can’t interrupt you).
by Spooky23 | 2025-10-05 15:59:56+00:00
Gambling encourages and creates bad behavior. I got to hang out at a local state-licensed casino for a few nights due to a work obligation.

Try it some time and people watch. At best, there's groups of people having a good time. Usually they seemed to be associated with music or convention activity. Mostly, it's depressing, with old people blowing their pensions on stupid slot machines. At worst, there's really obvious criminal activity with people washing money on table and poker games.

The only gambling thing that I ever thought could be good was the state lottery bonds they have in the UK and Ireland. Basically, it's like a CD for lottery... you the interest is a prize pot. But your principal is still there.

The online sports betting thing is gross. My son is 13, and many of the boys are totally enthralled with sports betting. We're creating addicts before they even earn money.
by Aurornis | 2025-10-05 16:00:16+00:00
The entire blog is full of characteristic LLM styles: The faux structure on top of rambling style, the unnecessary and forced bullet point comparisons with equal numbers of bullets, the retreading of the same concept in different words section after section.

The rest of the blog has even more obvious AI output, such as the “recursive protocol” posts and writing about reality and consciousness. This is the classic output you get (especially use of ‘recursive’) when you try to get ChatGPT to write something that feels profound.
by wizzwizz4 | 2025-10-05 16:00:32+00:00
It's an interesting keyboard layout, though.

± 2 3 3 2 6 7 8 0 0 = * - M W C B T Y U F O P ] [ [ [ A G G E R H J K L | / ├ examb ² X C V B N M / ꕯ └ ;

Your other keyboard has even more exotic glyphs: is that APL?
by ViewTrick1002 | 2025-10-05 16:01:12+00:00
Look at the cost per GW for the Bruce and TVA ”SMR”.

They are in line or worse than Vogtle, and they haven’t even started building.

Nuclear power has been experiencing negative learning by doing for half a century.

It is a known entity. All in all an extremely complex coal power plant.

New built regular coal power plants are not competitive in 2025 either. Now make it even more complex.
by alphazard | 2025-10-05 16:01:19+00:00
It sounds like there is probably some ongoing drama here, but aside from that: this post has convinced me that standards this important need to be decided on by organizations that aren't a government.

I wonder who else could reasonably host a standardization process? Maybe the Linux Foundation? All the cryptography talent seems to be working on ZK proofs at the moment in the Ethereum ecosysetem; I think if Vitalik organized a contest like NIST people would pay attention.

The most important thing is to incentivize attackers to break the cryptography on dummy examples instead of in the wild. Ideally: before the algorithm is standardized. The Ethereum folks are well setup to offer bounties for this. If a cryptographer can make FU money through responsible disclosure, then there is less incentive to sell the exploit to dishonest parties.