MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by leobg | 2025-11-22 06:27:25+00:00
I kept reading hoping to eventually learn whats the app actually does. But it’s one euphemism after the other, plus the occasional wink to “read between the lines”.

How can the author complain about Apple binning this app away in a weird niche if he as its maker doesn’t have the guts to plainly say what the app actually, really does?
by LMSolar | 2025-11-22 06:29:28+00:00
The article mentions light bulb durability. There was a cartel, the awesomely-named Phoebus Cartel [1] that encouraged its members to reduce the typical operating life of bulbs from 2500 hours to 1000 hours to increase bulb sales.

So the author's list of 'Why Stuff is Bad' should * certainly * include 'lack of anti-trust laws and enforcement'. Rent-seeking, anti-trust, regulatory capture should all be mentioned in this under-thought blog product.

Seriously, not mentioning useful regulation and standards as a countermeasure to the negative trends the author describes seems like willful blindness.

[1] Phoebus Cartel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoebus_cartel
by valzevul | 2025-11-22 06:30:51+00:00
That’s fair feedback, thank you. The point I was trying to make wasn’t "my app deserves a lower rating", it was "I built something for adults and realised there isn’t actually a correct category for it at all."

Once I noticed that gap, I went digging into the history to understand why the App Store age ratings and categories are the way they are, hence this archeological detour of a post.
by rayiner | 2025-11-22 06:30:59+00:00
> You ignored the things I was actually trying to ask you about and instead focused on a point where I specifically called out that we wouldn't agree - a point I specifically conceded for the purpose of this discussion because I didn't think arguing it was productive... .. I am not talking about what I'd accept. I'm asking why you aren't advocating for it as something you would accept.

I'm not trying to talk past you. My point is that, in formulating my own policy, I cannot overlook our ideological conflict. If we agreed on the premises that culture is a cause of societal prosperity, and that culture is durable in immigrants, and we only disagreed about degrees, then it would be possible to reach a nuanced compromise. But it's not possible to formulate a stable compromise with people who cannot, starting from their ideological axioms, rationally justify any restrictions on immigration. No compromise will be enforced, and we will have mass immigration by default. That's the history of immigration law dating back to the 1965 INA.

Given that, it's rational to simply pick which of the two maximalist approaches you prefer. When a Biden gets elected, the borders are opened and we have mass immigration. When a Trump gets elected, the reaction must be equal and opposite.

> You may say that you don't actually think "people from culture X are not worth bringing to the US," but given the above, that is what you are functionally advocating for.

No, that doesn't logically follow. Just because I think the costs outweigh the benefits--because any openings left open will be abused to enable mass immigration--doesn't mean I think the benefits are zero.

> If you think the US is better off with you in it, then "just reject everyone from country/culture X" is not the right approach.

I think my immigrating to the U.S. was a regression to the global mean. America is more like Bangladesh as a result of my coming here. (Ask my wife, who has to deal with the elaborate but inefficient rituals of being a Bangladeshi daughter in law.) All else being equal, American citizens would have been better off importing an orderly Dane or Norwegian or Japanese instead.

> You are advocating that the ladder be pulled up behind you, and me, and everyone else in this country who is successful as the child of immigrants.

Your "pulling the ladder up" analogy implies I should favor extending a benefit to an immigrant because I received that benefit myself. But, as a citizen, my duty runs to my fellow citizens, not to foreigners who share my immigrant background. In my analysis, only the benefit to existing U.S. citizens matters. And I don't think American citizens benefit from expanding Bangladeshi enclaves around the country.
by hintklb | 2025-11-22 06:31:52+00:00
I had exactly the same experience. I was in a public school full of assholes and teachers that couldn't care less about any bullying taking place. Those few years were probably the worse years of my life.

I grew significantly and became a different person when I was moved to a different school.

I still think it taught me a lot about the world and how people really are. I really lost a lot of faith in humanity in those few years and still see the world as cynical in which all people are in it for themselves.

Did it make me stronger? Maybe. But also I wish I could see the world more positively as a lot of people that have been shielded from those experiences seem to do.
by zero0529 | 2025-11-22 06:32:14+00:00
I am going to add it to my watch list on GitHub as it looks interesting. However, as the other post said, it needs an elevator pitch and do not be afraid to include more pictures.

I have a hard time finding the features of the program from the repository alone. For me personally, I do not have time to do a deep dive into the code (or even the api spec) of potentially interesting software to figure out what is going on. Especially in your case where it seems to use a pure functional approach in typescript, which creates additional overhead :) Best of luck with the project.
by standardUser | 2025-11-22 06:33:08+00:00
My schools were good, just an middle class CA suburb, but still good, especially our high school. And we had moderately impressive facilities and equipment that we could certainly not recreate at home. And of the roughly 30 teachers I had in high school, maybe 5 or 6 were really impressive - mostly in advanced classes - and they made all the difference. They were very smart, some of them overeducated, and they represented an entirely different type of adult in my life that I desperately needed, given the ultra-hierarchical nature of most family units.
by atoav | 2025-11-22 06:33:26+00:00
> Who would plant a flower next to a sick or hostile one?

A gardener who understands that after that short grace period that plant will have to grow amongst those sick and hostile ones essentially and not only that, it will have to form a thriving ecosystem with them.

I get the idea of wanting to protect your child at all cost and wanting the best possible education for them. Rarely have I found that former students with over-protective parents that put them down a funnel of other kids from the same social and ideological background have really thrived. And I work in university level education meaning I get to see first hand what is usually the first phase in a persons life where they can decide for themselves how to do it. The people with self-confidence and stable roots who make the best, are usually those who "have seen it all", while those with alternative schooling backgrounds are either completely in their own world (often with rude awekenings) or constant feelings of inadequacy and comparison with others. That is anecdotal evidence by one educator, so details may matter.

Aside from those individual aspects, there absolutely is a societal aspect to that. If gated communities are the solution, then your society has to be in what is already a pretty dystopian position. Having those isolated silos mean in a world of isolated social media silos, we give our kids even less possibility to experience the reality of other members of the society we expect them to repair.

That shoulders them with an impossible task. My deep believe is that the goal of education is to prepare people for their life, but also to give them the tools to make the world they are sent into a better place. That requires a healthy dose of "knowing what is", especily if what is, is ugly.
by mk89 | 2025-11-22 06:33:31+00:00
> They're not sitting down and deriving from first principles that AI is the way--they're seeing their buddies steering other companies and they're all saying AI is the way, so they say AI is the way, too.

I think you're underestimating a bit. We must implement AI because they were able to sell it so good that they got billion $ investors (see all the money coming from Qatar/saudi arabia etc). That's a lot of money coming in that allows to innovate/etc.
by raincole | 2025-11-22 06:34:55+00:00
I think anyone who ever looked at typical Vulcan code examples would reach the same conclusion: it's not for application/game developers.

I really hope SDL3 or wgpu could be the abstraction layer that settles all these down. I personally bet on SDL3 just because they have support from Valve, a company that has reasons to care about cross platform gaming. But I would look into wgpu too (...if I were better at rust, sigh)
by dartharva | 2025-11-22 06:34:58+00:00
That's exactly the problem, "meaning in life" has no static definition and there is no possible way to explain it in general terms, even for people who proclaim to have "found" it.

Pills, on the other hand, are easy to understand. This is not to say that they are a viable substitute in any way, but it does explain why so many prefer substance treatments.
by illiac786 | 2025-11-22 06:35:24+00:00
No I get what the GP meant. Your comment sounded like a triviality from Lapalisse a bit, because I cannot think of any occurrence where underestimating something is a good thing. Bit like “15 min before my death I will be alive”. But Lapalisse too didn’t mean it literally, he just wanted it to sound like that, it seems it’s what you did.

Much better than sarcasm then =)
by robertakarobin | 2025-11-22 06:35:37+00:00
My kids go to a ordinary public school. They are very bright, cautious, and thoughtful, and generally pretty happy and upbeat. There is a strong correlation between academic intelligence and mental illness. Being depressed to the point of being suicidal and having a sunny disposition are not mutually exclusive at all. I absolutely agree that it would be disturbing and disappointing for a child to be medicated because of something stupid they said when they were seven. I think medication may be appropriate if they show a consistent pattern over several months of physiological symptoms and reactions that are consistent with depression or anxiety, and cannot be explained by external factors like trauma or major life changes.
by cjlooi | 2025-11-22 06:35:45+00:00
It works! After the initial data load (big paper), the scrolling and performance works nicely.

Can visit at sciencestack.ai/arxiv/2105.10386

Note: no support for nomenclature/index yet. I'm also working on refactoring the data/json to a streaming model (right now it's one big json dump on load)
by AnthonyMouse | 2025-11-22 06:36:14+00:00
> kinda dumb when they have your plates they can just mail you a fine

Except that the person trying to get away knows that too, so if all they're doing is buying themselves a bigger fine, why are they doing it?

The answer to that could be because they stole the car, or because there's a body in the back, in which case mailing them a fine doesn't work.
by tjpnz | 2025-11-22 06:37:08+00:00
>If you were around for the early App Store, you’ll remember its optimism: accelerometer-driven beer glasses, wobbling jelly icons, flashlight apps that set brightness to 100% because no one had ever considered the idea before. The ecosystem assumed “content” meant pictures, sound, or the occasional cow-milking simulator–not a user quietly describing part of their life to themselves.

I miss when tech was actually fun.
by phyzix5761 | 2025-11-22 06:37:45+00:00
I see it a bit differently. In marketing, companies like AppLovin with the Axon Engine and Zeta Global with Athena are already showing strong profitability, both in earnings and free cash flow. They’re also delivering noticeably higher returns on ad spend compared to pre-AI tools for their customers. This is the area I’m researching most closely, so I can only speak for marketing, but I’d love to hear from others seeing similar results in their industries.
by atoav | 2025-11-22 06:37:52+00:00
And I grew up among median kids till I was 19 and never did adjust to the median (neither did my group of friends foinf to the same school). My younger brother however did.

There are kids who will have the tendency to adjust to others and there are kids who don't. This has to do with the self-confidence they bring with them before they enter their first day of school, friends they have/had outside school and it is not necessarily a thing a parent can always control in a predictable manner.

For all we know in your case it could even be that your kid learned they have to follow the others in private school and then applied that lesson in the next one. What I am saying here is that having learned the lesson "you need to adjust to your peers" is the problem, not that the peers are the "wrong" ones.
by porridgeraisin | 2025-11-22 06:38:01+00:00
> parental involvement

This is the _most_ important thing. Parents keeping a laser eye on their kids' performance in school, and having their own standards that the school must live up to, regardless of what commitees and boards and suits and academics and "experts" say. Even if it's just a standard for math competence. If the school isn't up to the mark, either pull up the school for it, or switch schools, or after school classes if it's an isolated problem. Many would be surprised at how many parents either can't(common in first generation educated) or won't do this.

> Spending has no correlation with success

In a setting where more spending is for more labour (when the labour is not done by parents/family) this is not true. Primary schools giving individual attention to students for example will do better than those with 100 students a class. But in most cases, more spending leads to more unnecessary flashy stuff. So in the real world, what you are saying is true.

Charter schools like yours are also sorely needed in america where math standards are absolutely woeful compared to RoW.
by djtango | 2025-11-22 06:38:07+00:00
I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not but that is kind of the truth. A breakup is horrible, in its worst case it is similar to an untimely death and can come with grief and maybe even worse because the person is still alive and in your life so you're reminded by their absence even deeper and could experience jealousy, and the drip feed of interaction can elongate the time it takes you to move on with your life and find the person who is more right for you.

But while the sadness is real and shouldn't be ignored or suppressed, wallowing is unhelpful and you ought to move on with your life - just like if someone close to you dies, the deceased most likely would want you to be happy and continue living a good life and move on.
by akomtu | 2025-11-22 06:39:18+00:00
I would say yes, that things below us is what we clearly understand and see, and things above us is what we are confused about. For example, the motions of electrons as well as the motions of galaxies is a mystery to us, so any lifeforms at those levels will be above us. Studying them won't be an option, as any meaningful understanding of their ways of life would require consciousness at their level.

When we blow air, the motion of air particles may be studied in a mechanical way, and some intelligent microbes, if such exist, would come to a naive theory of air motion, as they are oblivious to what brings that air into motion. It's understandable, because many generations of those microbes change while we exhale just once. Similarly, what we perceive as magnetism or even the time itself might be some incomprehensible formless lifeform, and it would see us as simple and predictable microbes.
by card_zero | 2025-11-22 06:39:34+00:00
So, Hardy focused on good explanations, and that was what he meant by beauty. Fair enough. The best objective definition of beauty I know of is "communication across a gap". This covers flowers, mathematics, and all kinds of art, including art I think is ugly such as Lucian Freud and Hans Giger I guess. So now I'm describing some things as beautiful and ugly at the same time, which betrays that there's a relative component to it (relative, objectively). That means I wish some things - including mathematics, which is usually tedious - communicated better, or explained things that seem to me to matter more: I feel in my gut that there's potential for this. So I don't rate mathematics as beautiful, any of it, personally.

But I'll admit its barely beautiful. Within which context, I guess the article's lawyering for the relative beauty of a matrix was a success, but I always liked them better than calculus or group theory anyway.
by bofadeez | 2025-11-22 06:40:03+00:00
If fentanyl were legalized, how much would you personally consume?

News flash: nobody does/does not do drugs based on legality.

The Rat Park experiment showed that rats in enriched, social environments consumed far less drugs than isolated rats, highlighting how environment strongly affects addiction.

In Defending the Undefendable, Jeffrey Moussaieff Masson’s chapter “The Pusher” argues that drug dealers, often vilified as destructive criminals, play a complex social role by supplying a demand that already exists. He suggests that punishing them does little to stop drug use and may actually exacerbate harm by driving the trade underground, increasing prices and danger. Since demand for illegal drugs is inelastic, higher prices directly leads to increase in petty crimes like theft that are often motivated by addiction. I.e. addicts wouldn't have to steal as many catalytic converters if drugs were pennies per day instead of hundreds of dollars. And it's only expensive because it's illegal. It's kind of ironic.

Dark speculation here, but addiction may even be an evolutionary coping mechanism, providing just enough short-term reward to keep individuals alive when life feels unbearable. The alternative to addiction might be even worse given e.g. an unusually strong biological emotional response to a (possibly accurate) negative assessment of their personal reality.
by kukkeliskuu | 2025-11-22 06:41:02+00:00
The article completely misses the point about the dating apps. It is not that the inferior product wins, but that if your product is so good that people only need one in their lifetime, you will quickly reach the limit on your sales. Planned obsolescence is a well-documented phenomenon in many fields.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_obsolescence
by vladvasiliu | 2025-11-22 06:42:16+00:00
> Also, don’t assign a EIP to your EC2 NAT instances (unless you absolutely must persist a given public IP) as that counterintuitively routes through public traffic. Just use a auto-assigned public IP (no EIP).

Could you point me to somewhere I can read more about this? I didn't know there was an extra charge for using an EIP (other than for the EIP itself).
by evanelias | 2025-11-22 06:43:20+00:00
It really doesn't make sense to read a 9.0 condition key comic like this. If you really wanted to read it, you would be better off buying a second reading copy in terrible condition.

The cost of the reading copy would end up being less than the negative impact to the condition (and therefore value) of your mint copy from reading it a single time.
by Rebelgecko | 2025-11-22 06:43:44+00:00
California's 3 strikes law only applies to "serious" felonies. The list is pretty reasonable IMO. No one is getting life in prison for littering or insurance fraud

It's basically a list of violent crimes, the only one that seems out of pocket is selling PCP, meth, or cocaine to childre, which is bad but could arguably be less bad than the others on the list
by pjmlp | 2025-11-22 06:46:12+00:00
SFINAE in 2025 is only reasonable in existing old code, or people stuck in old compilers.

Since C++17 there are better options.

Despite all its warts, most C++ wannabe replacements, depend on compiler tools written in C++, and this isn't going to change in then foreseeable future, based on the about two decades that took to replace C with C++ in compiler development circles, even though there is some compatibility.
by vkou | 2025-11-22 06:49:30+00:00
> In 50 years, the proportion of the budget allocated to food, halved.

Sure. But 50 years ago, healthcare and education didn't cost an arm and both legs. In those 5 decades, every single rent-seeker that you need to engage with to live has dipped his hand deeper into our pockets.

> I live in an area where small, local, sometimes organic producers are gathered to sell their product to the community in a way it is accessible to every budget....

You forgot the "For the brief period of time their produce is in season."

Only selling what you have, when you have it removes a lot of costs from food supply chains. If, like the local grocery, those small, local, organic producers had to keep you fed 24/7/365, their prices would go up - by a lot.

I am also pretty confident that those small, local, organic producers aren't the source of most of their customers' caloric demands.
by iLemming | 2025-11-22 06:52:25+00:00
> it is always preferable not to have a cost.

Of course. That's why every programmer today is fluent in assembly.

> like e-commerce.

You're misinformed. I don't know where you're getting all this, but I have done enough front-end work and have built ecommerce solutions - clojurescript works better than many different things I've used, and believe me - I've tried more than just a few things over the years - livescript, gorillascript, coffeescript, icedcoffescript, typescript, haste, fay, ghcjs; I've considered elm, purescript and reasonml. The only thing I have not built with it for web is games. That's the only domain where theoretically I may have hit limitations, but because I've never done that in practice, I can't even say what those limitations could be, but I know, people have done that with great success.

Pitch.com have built their platform for presentations in clojurescript, Whimsical - their chart drawing boards, and you don't even have to imagine - that shit would need to squeeze out every drop of a cycle for canvas/WebGL and DOM updates. Most web app bottlenecks are architectural - bad algorithms, inefficient data structures, unnecessary re-renders, and Clojurescript is just amazing to deal with these kinds of problems.

> bindings to the raw JS and DOM APIs

You're saying nonsense. Clojurescript directly can call any javascript function and whatever APIs. Please at least google, or ask an LLM before blurting out nonsense like this. I don't know what emotional level of insecurities you're dealing with, but I advise you to try out things instead of prematurely reaching the level of "I hate this" without even understanding what you're actually hating. It's not that hard. These days you don't even have to learn all the intricacies of compiling it, you can use Squint - the light-weight dialect of Clojurescript. It's as easy as using a regular script tag.

https://github.com/squint-cljs/squint

Or don't use it, who cares? Stay in your mental FUD castle, letting theoretical constraints become real ones by never testing their boundaries. I have used Clojurescript, I liked it and will use it again - I have seen with my own eyes how it actually works much better than any other alternatives I have tried so far - in practical web apps that I shipped to production. I'm not married to it - it simply makes sense. For many practical reasons it does. Whenever it stops making sense and I find a better alternative, I will switch without hesitation. For now, it just works for me.
by gldrk | 2025-11-22 06:52:48+00:00
>Yes, in a very superficial sense, you can't literally route a packet over the internet backwards to a host behind NAT without matching a state entry or explicit port forwarding.

Don’t forget source routing. That said, depending on your threat model, it’s not entirely unreasonable to just rely on your ISP’s configuration to protect you from stuff like this, specifically behind an IANA private range.