MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by jakeydus | 2025-10-14 22:26:58+00:00
Agreed. I think the newscaster joke in arrested development was a solid demonstration of this point. For those who don't know it, the showrunners would frequently insert a news clip of the same reporter summarizing whatever silly plot was going on, ending with: "What this means for your weekend, at 10."

Honestly that's what people watch the news for. What are external factors that they were previously unaware of that might impact their lives (or weekends)? Most (not all) people are aware of the dangers posed by heart disease. They're not watching the news to learn about something they're already aware of.

I might be beating this horse to a second death, but there's a section of road near where I live that's dangerous, and we all know it's dangerous. It's not newsworthy. If another section of road collapsed and introduced a new danger, then that's newsworthy. News is newsworthy because it's new and unfamiliar. If something is reported on that's old and unfamiliar, then that's a documentary. If it's new and familiar, then that's a paradox. Or maybe a fun anecdote at a party.
by andrewmutz | 2025-10-14 22:27:02+00:00
> Charts like this are misleading because they don't take age into account. It's not really noteworthy that old people die of heart disease and cancer.

I think this is the whole point of the article. The news does not cover reality as it is, it selects information that is noteworthy and drives clicks/views/engagement/ad revenue.

This is why the news has been shown to increasingly misrepresent reality:

https://www.nber.org/papers/w32026
by Izkata | 2025-10-14 22:27:25+00:00
It's a sci-fi thing, think of it along the lines of "What do you mean Skynet has gone rogue? Can't you just turn it off?"

(I think something along these lines was actually in the Terminator 3 movie, the one where Skynet goes live for the first time).

Agreed though, no relation to the actual post.
by torginus | 2025-10-14 22:27:34+00:00
Why would it be bad for that price? Highly accurate ADCs are pretty easy to make, provided you don't need a high sample rate, thanks to the magic of signal processing. Delta-sigma ADCs, and ramp ADCs can use a single bit of digital input + some pattern hold circuitry to do incredibly accurate measurements, it's just they take some time.

If you want a flash ADC that can do 16 bit (and can do 16 bit at 100Mhz), however you'll have to probably mortgage your house.
by gremlinunderway | 2025-10-14 22:27:51+00:00
Who currently gets fired due to engineering malpractice? It would be the same thing if there was actual certifications and engineering sign-offs in cybersecurity or other critical areas of development.

I wont pretend that accountability in the physical engineering world is all smiles and rainbows but at least there are actual laws dictating responsibilities, certification and other real consequences for civil engineers. When a Professional Engineer in Canada signs-off (seal) on work they are legally assuming responsibility which means the practitioner could be held accountable in the event of professional misconduct or incompetence regarding the engineering work. There is no reason but corporate greed and corruption why there isn't similar legislation in North America for cybersecurity or software engineering where you have professional bodies certify people to be legally obligated to sign-off on work (and refuse work that isn't up to standards).

But this would require introducing actual legislation which god-forbid how could we do such a thing to the poor market! It would stifle their innovation at leaking everyone's data.

There's no reason we couldn't extend the same existing system of licensure [1] that professional engineers require.

Sure maybe its overkill for someone stringing together a python app, but if you're engineering the handling of any actual personal information then this work ought to be overseen by qualified, licensed and accountable professionals who are backed by actual laws.

[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Regulation_and_li...
by AndrewKemendo | 2025-10-14 22:28:04+00:00
Much like the end of history wasn’t the end of history

LLM-Attention centric AI isn’t the end of AI development

So if they are successful at locking in it will be at their own demise because it doesn’t cover the infinity many pathways for AI to continue down, specifically intersections with robotics and physical manipulation, that are ultimately way more impactful on society.

Until the plurality of humans on the earth understand that human exceptionalism is no longer something to be taking for granted (and shouldn’t have been) there’s never going to be effective global governance of technology.
by milkytron | 2025-10-14 22:28:09+00:00
Yes. And I've structured a decent amount of my life around transportation independence.

My last car will probably be my current car from 2013, which I have replaced the engine in, and plan on replacing the transmission in when that goes, as well as other parts as needed. Rust is basically what is going to kill it and I can stave that off for a long time.

When that day comes, it won't really matter. I live near a quarter mile from a train station, 200 feet from a bike trail that connects to my city's bike network, and 50 feet from a bus stop. No need for a car really ever. Rentals exist for car needs every few months, but there are usually other options.

The key for me was to not be dependent on any singular mode of transportation and to have redundancy so that if any single option isn't working, I have at least one other option to go places.
by schrijver | 2025-10-14 22:28:14+00:00
I don’t think there’s any single way to be sure, but it sure reads like ChatGPT to me. Which I’m not sure is such a bad thing—I presume the author used an AI to help them write the story, but the story is real. Or maybe they edited it themselves to make it sound more generic. Whatever the reason, the style takes away from my reading experience. It’s a blog post, I expect some personality!
by laterium | 2025-10-14 22:29:11+00:00
Why is the hope that value is proportional to wage being removed and not increased productivity? The problem with this thinking is it already assumes an AGI/ASI replacing all work, rather than a force multiplier like with industrialization, electricity, and computing. AI being touted as the "final solution" doesn't mean anything if AGI is not right around the corner, and it isn't.

If AI is so successful that it can replace even 10% of current work that will be reflected in higher GDP and worker producitivity in the economy. Everyone has this cynical assumption that all benefits will go to the rich, but it hasn't been that way with the previous revolutions either, has it? Did cars only benefit the rich? Trains, radio, television, computers? Initially, that always seems like the case. Who could buy computers in the 80s? But the technology diffuses into the whole economy over time.
by HeyLaughingBoy | 2025-10-14 22:29:11+00:00
No one said that they had no need for modern machinery. It's an "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" approach. If you have a manufacturing process that was dialed in perfectly 20 years ago, and your customer(s) is still buying those parts, made on that machine, there is no benefit to moving them to another machine that now has to be set up just right, have the new parts coming off it QC'd to make sure that they are identical to what came off the old one, etc.

It's work that you don't need to do and that you won't get paid for. If the old machine breaks, then maybe it would make sense to move the job to something newer.

I used to work with someone whose entire business was retrofitting old machine tools with modern controllers when the decades-old electronics failed. You'd be amazed how much of this stuff is still out there.
by jeroenhd | 2025-10-14 22:29:14+00:00
iOS famously doesn't allow reloading themes or software. It's part of why they struggled to find a carrier to launch with in the beginning, because carriers modifying phones used to be the norm.

There are settings carriers can push to iOS (access to features like tethering, some network configuration stuff) but this type of malware cannot be pushed onto iOS. At worst, carriers push shitty Java applets to the (e)SIM, but that's all sandboxed off from any user interaction.
by Andrex | 2025-10-14 22:29:31+00:00
TBH I've come around on it and I kinda prefer the Fischer Price phone UIs over the sites with random smatterings of 7px microfont, .ASPX pages redirecting eighteen times, and functions hidden two levels deep in floating overflow navs (which don't properly track hover state and disappear when you try getting into a deeper level).

But it's really a pick-your-poison situation. All of it sucks on some level haha.
by SpecialistK | 2025-10-14 22:29:42+00:00
> This is a straw man.

Just calling something a strawman does not make it a strawman. "Motte and Bailey" would be a better accusation, if you do assert that religion is less significant to someone's worldview than their politics.

> It is reasonable for you to be upset when I say you do not belong in my country

Sure, I've been a new immigrant before and have felt that pang of discomfort when "othered." It's part of why I personally am very pro-immigration. It helps that I'm both from and moved to countries which have very open attitudes to immigration. Not every country is the same: Denmark is among the most critical countries in Europe to immigration. Are Danish people simply not allowed to hold that view? What about Japan (obv. not in Europe, but still) - is that society and its people "bad" or "wrong" for not being more accepting to immigrants than Germany or Canada or the UK? dhh actually touches on these topics in depth in one of the posts you are likely alluding to ("As I remember London" 2025-09-15) with quotations from Denmark's (SocDem) PM.

> not reasonable for you to be upset when I say I am Christian.

Why? If you are not of my faith, you are rejecting it and saying that I am wrong about the most important thing in all of metaphysics. And potentially will be punished or doomed for that. Religion is a core part of many people's worldview and politics. It's also a great indicator of how well pluralism is working in a society. If Christians and Muslims are bombing each other's places of worship, that's bad. If they can coexist despite their fundamental differences in theology and ethics, that's good. And so it should be extended to alternative political views.

This isn't because I want to defend any particular policy or person, but because the pendulum always swings and its what we do now that dictates what will be done to us in the future. In a democracy, when all of the votes are counted, the loser phones the winner and congratulates them. If the incumbent lost, there is a peaceful transition of power. It doesn't matter if the loser thinks (rightly or wrongly) that the winner will run the country into the ground and harm the people. It doesn't matter if their entire campaign was based on lies or misrepresented facts. The rules of the game say that you accept the vote and the process whether it goes your way or not.

That is what allows elections to not become riots and civil wars. It is what allows debates rather than assassinations. It is what allows me to hold the door open at the coffee shop no matter if the person behind me voted for $foo [wants to keep housing prices high and cut social spending, evil] or for $bar [promised free candy, savors of the nation] or if they are wearing clothing from a different faith from me. And they'll do the same for me.

This is all basic social empathy. You feel they're wrong, they feel you're just as wrong, you look past it because the alternative is so much worse. If you can't internalize that anyone would ever disagree with you and therefore we should not have a society which allows for peaceful disagreements, then that's on you.
by k310 | 2025-10-14 22:29:47+00:00
It sure varies. I was engineer (titles: SE, Systems Engineer, later Technical Account Manager) with a great sales rep at Sun. She set up all the appointments, prepped me on customer needs, the works. Downside was when she went on a diet and believe me, Jamba Juice doesn't cut it.

She left for Interwoven. In the meantime, I handled most of two jobs, with sales reps flying up from L.A. to help. We worked one major proposal for a college library that was pretty cool but never flew. Had some great customer meetings. The customer knew a great sushi place nearby. (No, it wasn't all about food. I wrote some great proposals.)

Got a rookie sales person who knew jack (lower case j) and came to customer meetings unprepared. Majorly pissed off a major customer by suggesting that they rip out all their servers and replace them. It was hell.

I joined a startup with another Sun person who was so sales oriented that he promised the world on a platter. Guess who had to deliver? Well, it all fell apart. I was so confused as scope increased and the crew was reduced in order of competence. Competent first.

I forgot simple things (rsync is a gift from the Gods) in the madness.

I sure missed the salad days (even if the salad was Jamba Juice).
by malwrar | 2025-10-14 22:30:44+00:00
I wish journalists would explore why the technical methods & information sharing that enable this surveillance are allowed to exist. Highlighting instances of abuse and the quasi-legal nature of the industry doesn’t really get at the interesting part, which is _what motivates our leaders to allow surveillance in the first place_.

I recently completed Barack Obama’s A Promised Land (a partial account of his presidency), and he mentions in his book that although he wanted to reform mass surveillance, it looked a little different once he was actually responsible for people’s safety. I often think about this when I drive past Flock cameras or walk into grocery stores; our leaders seem more enticed by the power of this technology than they are afraid of vague abuses happening in _not here_. It seems like no one sees a cost to just not addressing the issue.

By analogy, I feel that reporting on the dangers of fire isn’t really as effective as reporting on why we don’t have arson laws and fire alarms and social norms that make our society more robust to abuse of a useful capability. People who like cooked food aren’t going to engage with anti-fire positions if they just talk about people occasionally burning each other alive. We need to know more about what can be done to protect the average person from downsides of fire, as well as who is responsible for regulating fire and what their agenda for addressing it is. I’d love to see an article identifying who is responsible for installing these Flock cameras in my area, why they did so, and how we can achieve the positive outcomes desired from them (e.g. find car thieves) without the negatives (profiling, stalking, tracking non-criminals, etc).
by t8sr | 2025-10-14 22:30:55+00:00
I’m admittedly a few years out of date in this, but weren’t those already kinda ruled out? I’ve never met anyone who took MOND seriously - it looks like it’s a pet project of a small number of people who cite each other, and people in different subfields have always been saying it doesn’t work for them (diffuse galaxies, etc.).

I know the current models favor cold DM, I thought the hot DM model was abandoned already when it became clear that clusters of any size exist?
by carefulfungi | 2025-10-14 22:31:01+00:00
As another DoDDS graduate, I'd add that (a) the military makes parents responsible for their children; (b) the worst kids gets deported back to the US; (c) the military can compel parental behavior (like family therapy); (d) DoDDS teachers are a self-selection for people with curiosity and an interest to travel and live abroad; (e) unit rotations mean a 1/3rd or more of the school population changes year to year - naturally breaking cliques.
by OutOfHere | 2025-10-14 22:31:29+00:00
IMHO, it is Google and Apple that are entirely at fault for allowing the software of their phones to grant such open access, with users unable to deny such access. If an ancient protocol mandates a response to be sent, the response might as well be fake. Also, silent exploits of Whatsapp, iMessage, SMS, etc. have existed for about a decade now, which should have been more than sufficient time to close all the loopholes. The only explanation that remains is that Google and Apple are conspiring with a third party to keep phones insecure.
by ryukoposting | 2025-10-14 22:31:42+00:00
Glad I wasn't the only one thinking this.

The paragraph ending with "Compare that with a microcontroller ADC with a fixed 3.3 V range: 9 ENOB steps are ~6 mV" also seems to insinuate that no MCU has an analog reference that's independent from the supply, which just isn't true at all. Hell, NXP has a few that have a built-in programmable reference.
by lazide | 2025-10-14 22:33:21+00:00
Like Stanford pulmonologist in less than a week for an asthma eval.

Meanwhile, my Mom waited months on Medicare for a heart eval due to arrhythmias.

Whatever plan you have, it doesn’t sound top tier?

This didn’t require high net worth, just a better plan through an employer - or you’re in an area with low specialist populations? Or some sort of low priority on a triage schedule?

If you have mm net worth, the specialists come to you - quickly - unless you really need the .001% specialist. and chances are you they don’t and it’s not worth it.

But even Kaiser had no issues giving less than a week access for anything important.
by nostrademons | 2025-10-14 22:33:35+00:00
California does too. Parents get around it in all sorts of ways. Donating (and having your employer donate) to a 501(c)3 PTA that then directly funds many of the enrichment activities at the school. Parent volunteers for things like robotics classes. In-kind donations: my kid's teacher let slip that they were running out of paper, my kid shows up to class the next day with 2 reams. After-school enrichment through things like Kumon or RSM. Home tutoring. Study sessions after school.

I'm not sure it'd be desirable (let alone legal) to prevent that, though. The point is to raise up the kids that are doing poorly, not to make the kids doing well also do poorly.
by jowea | 2025-10-14 22:33:43+00:00
I believe homicide rate is frequently cited simply because it's the only crime rate that is remotely reliable. Other crimes get underreported but it's hard for the police to ignore a body with a gunshot wound.

Although it would be an interesting chart. But the distinction between what is noteworthy/newsworthy and what actually kills is precisely the point of investigating this topic.
by s1artibartfast | 2025-10-14 22:33:55+00:00
To pile on, You can learn a tremendous amount from reading difficult sources, specifically due to their difficulty. Nobody reads classical fiction for the facts.

It is an exercise in cognitive flexibility and challenge. It builds the capability to understand complex ideas and challenging contexts. These are important skills in navigating a world that is in fact complex and nuanced.

If someone can only understand short sentences and bullet lists, they will struggle in the real world and be vulnerable to manipulation.
by BeetleB | 2025-10-14 22:34:26+00:00
And I'm saying it's "usually" only for major stories that have continued coverage.

For the rest (which may be close to the majority), I'm saying "No".

> There's also no alternative as it's great for this one situation you had insight but the vast majority of people don't.

I've had insight in a number of unrelated events that were covered by journalists. Each time they get important details wrong.

There is an alternative. Don't trust the articles on these stories.
by ath3nd | 2025-10-14 22:34:52+00:00
> People generalizing about how bad LLMs are at coding are often doing it out of a very unusual perspective (like J Blow) or doing it out of bad faith.

Thats why the only study up to date on developer productivity with AI shows 19% reduction of productivity and the most up to date study on LLM usage in the enterprise show that 95% of projects with LLMs fail.

I'd say its bad faith to claim LLMs are useful considering all studies so far show the opposite.
by mpalmer | 2025-10-14 22:35:30+00:00
> Signing it (or not) is an act of expression

And I myself am not a lawyer in the slightest, but this specific claim feels pretty iffy from a 1A standpoint.

The government is not prohibited from setting rules for access to their facilities. If they apply rules unevenly, that is the sense of arbitrary that applies here. Arbitrary administration of rules, not arbitrary in the sense that someone finds the rule itself to be arbitrary.

When rules are arbitrarily administered in a situation when constitutional rights are at issue, that is where the rubber the meets the road in a constitutional law sense. This goes (I believe) to the Equal Protection clause of the 14th amendment.

If the courts allowed the government to deny a press org access (and thus suppress their speech) according to some obscure rule, while other press orgs that are technically violating the same rule continue to enjoy access, that creates an environment where the government has carte blanche to violate constitutional rights by creating subtle inequity in their admin of the rules.

That they can make said rules is well-established - IF the rule itself is constitutional. That is a separate legal concern from the uneven admin scenario.

What I'm saying up above is: this isn't uneven admin, less likely there are grounds for a 1A claim. Whether this signature requirement passes muster is entirely different, and I'm less informed on that part of the law. I certainly don't like it, though.
by ianferrel | 2025-10-14 22:35:43+00:00
The author of this article:

1. Has the technical skills to disassemble this device, trace circuit boards, design his own boards and custom software to interface with components to substantially reverse engineer this device.

2. Is totally mystified when his internet connected device stops working after he blocks its communication, and rather than try unblocking it and seeing if it works again, sends it out for repair repeatedly.

Something here doesn't add up. Tastes like bullshit to me.
by dmix | 2025-10-14 22:35:46+00:00
CSS isn't exactly a clean language. In my experience most projects are write-only... CSS just accumulates. It is rarely refactored or carefully designed. It is only occasionally mass deleted in redesigns and redone. Having a standard namespace pattern eliminates a lot of hierarchical issues, which is a very common issue with CSS.

Utility based libraries tend to avoid this these days and use simpler names, but those are also supposed to be your root libraries, not your custom CSS.
by colechristensen | 2025-10-14 22:36:03+00:00
On the other hand, iOS is popular because of quality issues like this. Android is only as good as it is because of the competition from Apple.

Before the iPhone you couldn't even get the "cool" phones in America, Japan had so much better things available and everybody envied what wasn't available here.

The reason we have any control from the carriers was the power Apple had and the stubbornness of Jobs.

A lot of the battles being lost by Apple are being won by groups who will make the ecosystem worse.
by hombre_fatal | 2025-10-14 22:36:05+00:00
On the other hand, you're most likely to die of heart disease, yet the interventions needed push heart disease well into old age should start as young as possible.

So if you wanted to improve your diet and lifestyle, it makes more sense to first pull the major levers that avoid or postpone your most likely killers before you, say, worry about food dyes.

Yet not even our new HHS seems to understand that.