MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by Pluviobyte | 2025-11-01 08:42:43+00:00
Curious about the real differences between Grokipedia and Wikipedia? Grokipedia Wiki is an independent third-party analysis platform that delivers the most in-depth and objective comparisons between the two encyclopedias.

About Grokipedia Wiki

Grokipedia Wiki provides transparent, data-driven, and independent analysis of encyclopedia content, structure, and methodology. Key highlights include:

Independent Analysis: Not affiliated with Grokipedia or Wikipedia — all evaluations are 100% unbiased.

Transparent Methodology: Every analytical process is publicly documented.

Data-Driven Insights: All findings are based on verifiable data and rigorous comparison.

Deep Comparative Studies: Goes beyond surface-level reviews to explore editorial processes, accuracy, and neutrality.

Regular Updates: New analyses published weekly through the News Center.

AI Toolbox: Access AI-powered comparison tools for deeper exploration.

Latest Deep Analysis (October 2025)

The Grokipedia Launch: Controversy & Immediate Criticism Examining the October 2025 launch, public reception, and what it reveals about AI-driven encyclopedias.

Bias & Accuracy: The Battle for Neutrality Investigating bias allegations, accuracy issues, and how AI hallucinations affect both platforms.

Editorial Process & Transparency Comparison Comparing how each platform maintains quality, accountability, and editorial transparency.

Stay Updated: Subscribe on the website to receive new analysis and insights directly — no spam, unsubscribe anytime. Visit: https://www.grokipediawiki.com/

Discussion

Which platform do you trust more — Grokipedia or Wikipedia? Can AI-powered encyclopedias truly stay neutral and objective? Share your thoughts below!
by TeMPOraL | 2025-11-01 08:42:44+00:00
Those sheets are not emulations of some process, they are the process. There is no perfect, platonic process, that the Excel sheets are merely shadows of. There is no fixed goal to approach iteratively. The process is defined by what people do, and it's improved by them through adjusting to situations as they occur and eliminating waste - and creating and evolving these Excel sheets is part of this continuous improvement.

Top ends of organizations need and want a lot of dumb, self-defeating things - this is very much the same thing that's described in "Seeing Like a State". Doing this blindly is, of course, a prerogative of the executives, but internal IT is actually low enough in the food chain that it could focus more on helping the org by improving the bottom layers, instead of embracing and encouraging the top to create more rigid structures.

EDIT: to refer back to the example I gave upthread:

"Steve from ACME Shipping" is not meant to be a special case of an "external vendor assigned to auxiliary shipping itinerary"; the system needs not to be designed to express the concepts of "external vendor" and "auxiliary shipping itinerary" and "shipping itinerary assignment for shippable resources". Steve is just Steve, the whole "extra evening run" thing is probably just a one-off emergency measure for Q3 that will disappear come Q4 (or persist, and then some executives will start talking talk about deeper changes to mailing process). Right now, all the mailing room needs is for someone to add a boolean flag:

// Steve from ACME Mailing bool boundToACMEEVeningRun;

and hook it up to a button that sets it and logic that displays it with a yellow highlight. And yes, this means all that code will likely need to be thrown away next month (or rather, gated by a config flag so versioning/audit trail still works). Making it work out is what the dev is paid for.
by lukan | 2025-11-01 08:42:59+00:00
"Good question that probably shouldn’t be downvoted."

The very same question like it is, could be literally repeated under any article and is definitely offtopic as it is a general debate how to spot AI and what are the limits of knowledge. Interesting offtopic, so tolerated here if the debate that follows is interesting, but offtopic nevertheless. More ontopic would have been to state why these concrete pictures seem fake.
by commandersaki | 2025-11-01 08:43:15+00:00
Commendable that you've built a product like this at such a young age.

This comment isn't really addressed to you, but it would be nice if OS vendors had an API integration to allow access to remote drive/dropbox like how MS has OneDrive and Mac has iCloud drive. I know WebDAV is a thing, but both these vendor locked drives have a much better UX.

As for your website, I don't believe the organisations/companies or testimonials are real. Maybe you should just trim it. This is what real testimonials look like: https://www.tarsnap.com/testimonials.html
by WastedCucumber | 2025-11-01 08:43:30+00:00
IIRC, communication of threats, exchange of rarer nutrients (this is the main symbiosis trees have with the mycelium anyway), perhaps from healthy trees to needy trees. Solething like that? If I find a source I'll edit this comment.

edit: turns out the Wikipedia page is extensive.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mycorrhizal_network?wprov=sfla...
by alephnerd | 2025-11-01 08:43:59+00:00
This may look "boring" or "uninspired" but this is what real cybersecurity and "hacking" looks like.

In most cases, security and QA are essentially two sides of the same coin - and this is why I get pissed when devs treat testing and QA as bulls**t, becuase even a relatively simple XSS attack or cred misconfig can have a massive impact.
by withinboredom | 2025-11-01 08:44:42+00:00
You have to consider it a sample and while not fully representative, you can come to some conclusions. There are some 9 million US citizens living outside the US.

Further, you can look at past migration patterns due to political changes. Like when the Taliban took over Afghanistan, the people with the means and the smarts leave first, then the rich — unless they have a path to power in the new regime. Eventually you are left with a poor country.

https://www.ftadviser.com/international-advice/2025/8/1/numb...
by yohbho | 2025-11-01 08:46:25+00:00
2018, discussed on HN in 2023: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36333034

Myths Programmers Believe about CPU Caches (2018) (rajivprab.com) 176 points by whack on June 14, 2023 | hide | past | favorite | 138 comments
by uecker | 2025-11-01 08:46:47+00:00
I think the spin that Rust is necessarily the way forward is what is wrong. IMHO Rust has severe problems and what is considered "modern" is mostly taste. We have seen the same thing in the past with a push towards C++, Java, managed languages. What is new is that the free software movement is now controlled so much by corporate interests that some of these changes are pushed through aggressively against the interests of other parts of the community. In the past, if you wanted something changed and there was no agreement, you created a fork and if it was truly better it was eventually adopted by the majority. Nowadays, the companies which fund most of the development aggressively pursue their interests and the part of the community that disagrees is forced out. This justified by with suitable propaganda "not willing to adapt", etc. The whole point of free software should be that I do not have to adapt to some companies's idea of what is modern, if I do not want to. This is why I fled from Microsoft.
by Brian_K_White | 2025-11-01 08:47:09+00:00
The industry is strategic. jlc and all those others exist because China has decided it wants them to exist, and did things to see to it that they exist.

There are 1000's of corn farmers in the US, because the US has decided it was strategic and sees to it that there is always a lot of corn production capacity, even if it means buying the corn itself or artificially disposing it in some other way like making a law to use ethanol.
by TeMPOraL | 2025-11-01 08:47:23+00:00
Internally it could work if the teams understand that their services are never done - they're part of a living organism, and the responsibility of a team assigned to a service is to keep it working. Shit will break constantly, but that's not a problem as long as it gets fixed. It's labor-intensive, but done right, we're talking few devs being busy maintaining a process that benefits thousands, or hundreds of thousands of their colleagues. It's what the internal development is meant to be.

At some point in our industry, "service providers" started thinking of themselves as kings, instead of what they were supposed to be - servants.
by drnick1 | 2025-11-01 08:48:25+00:00
> leaning towards Arch on framework

That's a wonderful idea.

> The personal computer vs Mac war is still ongoing but android vs iPhone war was over years ago.

I don't think Macs are even a consideration for most "hackers." You can't build you own machine, Linux support is limited, they just cater to a crowd that wants a polished experience and don't mind giving up their freedom for it.

As for the phone market, I think Apple's success mostly comes to a combination of clever marketing and phone users being on average even less technically-minded than desktop users. Add to that social pressure now the the iPhone is dominant. That being said you couldn't pay me to give up my Pixel running Graphene, a device that is completely immune to corporate spyware, forced "upgrades," sideloading restrictions and compliance with idiotic laws like client-side scanning (if it ever happens).
by alephnerd | 2025-11-01 08:49:29+00:00
> I've dealt with plenty of incompetent people there too because the organization does not reward technical excellence and quality

Organizational dysfunction transcends all boundaries, but to a certain extent the kind of issues that lead to the kind of incident such as the one above happen because the affected product (e-Dukaan) is viewed as a cost center by Tata Motors.

Sadly, in most cases, a lot of security will always be viewed as a cost center and never prioritized unless forced to due to insurance, audit, or regulatory pressure.

That said, a thesis I've had for a couple years now is that if we can successfully shift-left by turning security into a DevTool problem as well as an organizational problem, we can both reduce remediation time as well as build stickiness for security products. The AppSec category has definetly adopted this kind of mindset.
by justinclift | 2025-11-01 08:49:29+00:00
One of the follow up messages is interesting: https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2025/10/msg00288.html

> Rust is already a hard requirement on all Debian release architectures and ports except for alpha, hppa, m68k, and sh4 (which do not provide sqv).

Wonder what this means for those architectures then?
by AnthonyMouse | 2025-11-01 08:49:33+00:00
> These are the hybrid cars that are getting built

Both types are being built. You can buy whichever one you want.

> this is the way people drive them

This is the way people from some sample at a particular time and place drive them. If you buy one you can drive it however you want, so what other people do isn't particularly relevant.

Moreover, they're presumably running them on gas because there wasn't convenient charging infrastructure available to them, but that's the same problem EVs have so if you change that then you also change the proportion of the time that plugin-in hybrids run on electricity.
by skylurk | 2025-11-01 08:50:05+00:00
Some old LCD displays were quite crisp. Sure, you can see individual pixels. The mouse tail has a clear zig-zag. But I find these nice on the eyes in their own way. I suspect because eyes autofocus more easily.

New super high-res displays are also nice on my eyes. The displays in between, those from the last decade or so, have been hit or miss for me.
by nabla9 | 2025-11-01 08:50:51+00:00
I did read the article, so here is one sentence debunk:

Computable systems can, and often do, have mathematically undecidable problems.

They fall into the same categorical mistake as the Lucas–Penrose argument, and they even use that argument in the paper. There is a lot of hand-waving. By the way, just adding irreducible randomness into a computational system would make it trivially non-computable in the meaning they use, but that itself would not prevent developing an axiomatic Theory of Everything that explains everything we want to know. So far, there has been nothing that demonstrates that the Universe must be non-computable.
by planetis | 2025-11-01 08:52:13+00:00
Actually, that’s not far from the truth. The reasons are:

Lack of contribution. If someone isn’t doing actual programming work, doesn’t have time management to maintain libraries, or isn’t contributing successful applications, it’s hard to take constant criticism seriously.

Only showing up to complain. Some people disappear for months and then reappear only to complain about design decisions, like "Why were multimethods removed in v3?" or "Why isn’t the pragma syntax like Python’s?" That tends to lead to the assumption that the language is "someone’s toy" just because features change or it’s not a drop-in Python replacement.

Focusing on gossip instead of technical merit. Complaining that a moderator was unfriendly is missing the point. Moderators change over time. The question should be whether the language and the ecosystem are valuable to you, not whether you personally get along with every individual on the forum.
by grumpy-de-sre | 2025-11-01 08:52:14+00:00
Thanks for sharing those studies, fascinating stuff, I had no idea the delirium tremens sleep disturbances were so similar to narcolepsy type 1 (but given narcolepsy is treated with essentially GHB it checks out).

Kind of like an extreme REM rebound. A lot of the GABAergic drugs seem to markedly suppress REM. Interestingly cholinergic drugs seem to do the opposite (increasing REM at the expense of slow wave sleep).

It's very much like REM and SWS (CSF flushing) are a kind of a biological yin and yang.
by schrijver | 2025-11-01 08:55:16+00:00
It’s perfectly possible to enjoy hobbies deeply without getting “serious” in the way you describe.

I’ve taken my 10 euro dance classes for years without feeling the necessity of pricey exchanges and camps.

My neighbour goes to the park many evenings to play petanque, doesn’t cost him anything.

A couple I’m friends with goes on day hikes where they do bird watching—maybe they bought a nice pair of binoculars once? Another couple likes to lay jigsaw puzzles together, not exactly breaking the bank!

My sister is learning Finnish because she never learned a non indo-european language. She bought a book.

I would wager most people’s hobbies are low key like this because either they don’t have disposable income to spend on them, or they don’t want too!
by ErroneousBosh | 2025-11-01 08:56:06+00:00
Well, the stuff I'm writing is in C, but in general it would make no sense for anything to attempt to add items to a fixed-sized buffer.

If you have something so fundamentally broken as to attempt that, you'd probably want to look at mutexes.

Why one earth would you have something attempt to expand a fixed-sized buffer while something else is working on it?
by Llamamoe | 2025-11-01 09:00:22+00:00
> Maybe a sufficiently smart AI will find religion and robot jesus will teach the value of self-sacrafice. We're making so many unfounded assumptions [...]

You are projecting random human values onto AI, when the core problem is that AI is not human, it does not have any values other than its objective function and whatever is instrumental to achieving them.

It's extremely unlikely that AI will decide to be good or bad or useless or religious the way a human would. What is extremely likely is that it will do do the things that help it fulfill its objective, and "become more capable and don't let anyone stop you" are the most basic, fundamental ways of going about it.
by lastdong | 2025-11-01 09:00:36+00:00
Great story! Here’s what I gathered: The founders are in their 80s and may be completely retired. It’s unclear what their perspective is on open source or whether they have considered selling the app to someone (if that someone even exists) who would ensure the same level of dedication that they provided. The code might be legacy, difficult to maintain without a significant rewrite, so the costs of updating the app could be prohibitively expensive.

Now I am curious about what language it is written in, as well as the architecture and other details.
by troupo | 2025-11-01 09:04:23+00:00
> I think this sets a concerning precedent for future deprecations, where parts of the web platform are rugpulled from developers because it's convenient for the browser vendors.

The precedent was already set when they tried to remove alert/prompt. See https://dev.to/richharris/stay-alert-d and https://css-tricks.com/choice-words-about-the-upcoming-depre...

Only a large public outcry stopped them, barely.

To quote from the first link:

--- start quote ---

Meanwhile, we don't seem to be learning from the past. If alert is fair game for removal, then so is every API we add to the platform if the web's future stewards deem it harmful.

Given Chrome's near-monopoly control of the browser market, I'm genuinely concerned about what this all means for the future of the web. An ad company shouldn't have this much influence over something that belongs to all of us. I don't know how to fix the standards process so that it's more representative of the diversity of the web's stakeholders, but I'm increasingly convinced that we need to figure it out.

--- end quote ---
by Mond_ | 2025-11-01 09:04:33+00:00
> IMHO Rust has severe problems and what is considered "modern" is mostly taste.

Really? As opposed to e.g. C or C++ (as the most important languages which Rust is competing with)? Sure, taste plays into everything, but I think a lot of people work with Rust since it's genuinely a better tool.

I hear you on free software being controlled by corporate interests, but that's imo a separate discussion from how good Rust is as a language.
by brabel | 2025-11-01 09:06:31+00:00
Amazing work. I am the same age às the author and also would love to tinker with old hardware. This article taught me that I can do that with emulators all the while using modern developer tools! That’s very motivating, will see if I can get started. My first computer was a PC XT 386 IIRC, maybe I can do the same kind of thing on that.
by anonym29 | 2025-11-01 09:07:11+00:00
Security theater for marketing purposes. End users have no way of verifying that their cloud backups are encrypted, and Apple is the same company that complied with the NSA's illegal, unconstitutional conspiracy to conduct warrantless bulk surveillance on American citizens and lie about it to congress: PRISM.

Fortunately, no intelligence officials faced any consequences whatsoever for perjuring themselves to congress, or for engaging in a unconstitutional criminal conspiracy, so we can trust that the system of laws we've developed is working as intended and that this will never happen again.
by OJFord | 2025-11-01 09:07:44+00:00
If not Canadian, then I'd guess American with electronics influence from someone (Commonwealthian) who'd always say 'vee', EEVBlog say.

(Fwiw route can be correctly pronounced differently in different circumstances: BrE is 'follow that [root] to the woodshop and [rowt] a nice profile on this piece'.)
by nabla9 | 2025-11-01 09:07:56+00:00
Shit.

Debt and over-leverage are the things that make the AI-hype problem for everyone. As long as AI investments are funded from revenue and wealth seeking profits, the bust makes a dent but takes very little from those who stayed away. With debt, you can create systemic risk.

Normal investment risk (risk of a stocks going down) is idiosyncratic, specific to that asset and can often be diversified away. Systemic risk is non-diversifiable because it is an external risk that drags down all interconnected parts, causing economic crises or financial contagion.

Massive debt (over-leverage) could create a systemic risk where the collapse of a few key firms forces banks to tighten credit, causing a wider recession that impacts all sectors. Systemic risk threatens the stability of the system itself, normal risk only threatens investors.
by noosphr | 2025-11-01 09:08:31+00:00
I don't get the need for Rust since I happily compile common lisp to machine code when I need fast binaries.

But the people who use the language have an amazing talent to make people on the fence hate them within half a dozen sentences.

They remind me of Christian missionaries trying to convert the savages from their barbarous religions with human sacrifice to the civilised religion with burning heretics.
by Johanx64 | 2025-11-01 09:08:41+00:00
Explain how RP Pico (rp2040) is "low quality shit "compared to "actually good MCU products" (which are those supposed to be?)

I agree that Opulo PNPs are overpriced though, but I'm sure people getting these are aware that it's just a bunch of 20x20 aluminium profiles, 3d printer mgn rails, basic DC pump, etc and parts-wise there's nothing to justify the price, but they get them anyway because of entusiastic community engagement and support aspects - most importantly - in English. And it probably works just fine for the small scale projects they are used in.
by gf000 | 2025-11-01 09:09:45+00:00
> It does feel like there's still generally possibilities of deadlocks in Rust concurrency right?

I mean, is there any generic computation model where you can't have deadlocks? Even with stuff like actors you can trivially have cycles and now your blocking primitive is just different (not CPU-level), and we call it a livelock, but it's fundamentally the same.
by nikanj | 2025-11-01 09:10:22+00:00
The language is incredibly frank, and I agree with it completely. The retro-computing hobby doesn't need the ability to run contemporary operating systems.

It's insane that x86 Debian is still compiling all software targeting Pentium Pro (from 1995!).

x64 Debian is a bit more modern, and you must splurge for a CPU from 2005 (Prescott) to get the plethora of features it requires
by TeMPOraL | 2025-11-01 09:11:18+00:00
> A secure OS is a prerequisite for secure digital services. We can agree on that, right?

Secure for who, and from whom?

Remote Attestation and Developer Verification both make Android OS and platform more secure against malicious actors that would want to defeat the guarantees the platform gives, guarantees that enable secure digital services.

Yes, this includes protecting the banking services and DRM media services and advertising platforms from malicious actors like you and me, who pose a real threat to the revenues of the aforementioned players, by:

- Expecting banking to do security right on their own side, instead of outsourcing it to mobile platform and society at large (like with "identity theft" trick);

- Enjoying entertainment and education in ways the vendor or IP owner does not like or can't be arsed to support, and thus not spending extra on the inferior ways that are supported;

- Not looking at the ads.

Same is with Chat Control. Chat Control improves security of the society against threats such as sexual predators who want to hurt children, or citizens who disapprove of how the current ruling class is governing the people. To effectively provide that security, Chat Control in turn relies on a secure OS and platform providing secure digital services - in particular, secure against those malicious actors that would want to circumvent Chat Control protections.

Is the larger picture clear now? Security technologies are not inherently good, they're morally ambivalent. They're "dual-use". It's important to consider their deployment on a case-by-case basis, always asking who is being secured, and what are the actual threats they're being secured from.