MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by rkomorn | 2025-11-09 08:11:42+00:00
Yeah, but even looking beyond individuals, my personal take is I'm no longer convinced, for example, all the massive amounts of electronics, fast fashion, and other consumerism-oriented production (which definitely do all use energy) are actually improving life. Same goes for a lot of online businesses that are occupying data centers and using electricity.

eg I'm unconvinced smart phones are truly improving life, let alone getting yearly incremental updates from every manufacturer.

So yes, to some extent, most life improvements are going to use some energy, but I wouldn't argue that most increases in spent energy lead to quality of life increases for a majority of people.
by jamesholden | 2025-11-09 08:12:23+00:00
"Deal under discussion would lower credit-card interchange fees for merchants, but could make it harder for consumers to use rewards cards at the register"

Surprise! The consumer loses again! It's always somehow benefiting everyone but the consumer. Too much control, not enough regulation. People shouldn't be bilked out of funds by paying to use their own money. We are shouldn't be _forced_ to use these service companies for making payments.
by cthalupa | 2025-11-09 08:12:53+00:00
I didn't stop changing doctors until I found one that would work with me. I didn't go to a fancy concierge doctor - I just shopped around. I didn't go through a string all at once, but when I needed to go to the doctor, if I hadn't liked the last one, I went to the new one. After 4-5 years of this, I found one.

Younger guy. Keeps up with the research. Is interested in hearing about the research. He'd recommended statins to me when I first started seeing him, but I really wanted to see if lifestyle/diet modifications could help - I didn't succeed long term. He was supportive. I came back a few years after and mentioned statins again, but that I was particularly interested in pitavastatin because it looked to have the best side effect/positive effect ratio. I also said I'd like to try to target an even lower level moving forward, even if pitavastatin would likely get me in range, and he agreed that the research showed this should be a positive, so he added ezetimibe.

As noted in the other comment, in most of the US you can just walk in to labcorp or quest or another provider and get tests done without a doctor. NY is to the best of my knowledge the only exception here. The providers have them for order on their websites, and you can usually go through places like jasonhealth or privatemdlabs to get even lower pricing for the same labs at the same places.
by toast0 | 2025-11-09 08:13:13+00:00
You've got the whole thing wrong.

Only one door plug fell out. Other door plugs were inspected but there was no reporting on their condition. The door plug seems to have fallen out due to lack of nuts, not missing screws. There was rework due to poor work from a spun out former subsidiary that required the door plug to be opened, but I think? the door plug was opened and closed by Boeing, and not properly recorded by Boeing in the work log, resulting in no inspection/verification and nobody else noticed the missing nuts either; IIRC the opening was recorded 'in the wrong place' and the closing wasn't recorded at all. I wouldn't call that a 'cutback inspection'

I don't remember which party is responsible for installing the interior trim that covers the door plug, but their checklist must not have included verifying that the door plug nuts and their retaining wire were in place, either.
by pyrale | 2025-11-09 08:16:35+00:00
This article is pushing its narrative so hard that it feels like the author's selection process was "I want to say something about Europe, which company would support my claims".

It's quite hard to understand whether the author wants to focus on Airbus (in which case, the article spends way too much time comparing EU/US and talking about Boeing), Europe (in which case it's missing plenty of other companies/sectors) or industrial policy (why speak about Europe at all? Chinese companies are a much more recent example of succesful industrial policies).
by cthalupa | 2025-11-09 08:19:50+00:00
How do people become experts on doing dangerous procedures on infants if they're not allowed to do dangerous procedures on infants until they're experts?

I agree with most of what the author wrote, even a decent amount in the paragraph in question, but not wanting residents to get hands on experience while under the direct supervision of experts just because it is you or a loved one on the receiving end is not a reasonable ask. You have to do things to become an expert on doing them, and that means someone has to be on the receiving end of someone with little or no experience doing them. They get experience doing similar procedures in lower risk settings, etc., but eventually when it comes time for someone to do their first lumbar puncture on an infant, it's better if they're doing it under the watchful eye of someone who has done many.
by shakna | 2025-11-09 08:19:51+00:00
Oh yay. More AI powered slop.

And I do mean slop.

It was fixed already: https://github.com/opencontainers/runc/pull/4751

So the bot goes ahead and spams every project that has already done the work. And unrelated ones.

Whilst also leaking that this is to do with a GEO-location project building a cluster on AWS, for Accenture. Probably government contract.
by deaux | 2025-11-09 08:21:38+00:00
[1]: Been around for 25 years, apparently employees 20 people and is still popular to this day. Donation-based.

[2] Seven paid staff members, $5 for an account, been around at least 22 years.

And there are bound to be a dozen outside the US that I don't know of. I've heard of this [3] being a Dutch one that had a good run for decades with multiple full-time employees, but can't confirm as I don't speak Dutch. Supposedly ad and donation sustained (?). Again, has outlived most social networks. Maybe a Dutch HNer who reads this can tell us more.

You can mean a thousand things by "profitable" but both achieve what I posited and what most commonly underlies "profitable": sustainable. And they are. They're easily in the top 1% of social networks by longevity. That the former is non-profit doesn't make a material difference, these are effectively medium-sized businesses as I posited.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Front_Porch_Forum

[2] https://www.metafilter.com

[3] https://www.fok.nl
by debugnik | 2025-11-09 08:23:48+00:00
First off, the escape hatches in TypeScript are way too accessible compared to OCaml: `JSON.parse(...) as MyInterface` is everywhere and completely broken.

And second, you're dismissing the fact that TypeScript is unsound, even worse it is so by design. Easy examples: uninitialized variables holding undefined when their type says they can't [1]; array covariance [2]; and function parameter bivariance, which is part of the TypeScript playground's own example on soundness issues [3] but at least this one can be configured away.

C# and Java made the same mistake of array covariance, but they have the decency of checking for it at runtime.

[1]: https://www.typescriptlang.org/play/?#code/DYUwLgBAHgXBB2BXA... [2]: https://www.typescriptlang.org/play/?#code/MYewdgzgLgBAllApg... [3]: https://www.typescriptlang.org/play/?strictFunctionTypes=fal...

As for your example, I agree that TypeScript unions and singleton types are powerful, but I can't see what are you speficially missing here that pattern matching and maybe an additional variant type doesn't get you in OCaml. You get exhaustiveness checking and can narrow the value down to the payload of the variant.
by kelnos | 2025-11-09 08:24:59+00:00
Not sure what country you live in, but my guess would be that your country hasn't made the same kind of noises about how wide-ranging GDPR enforcement actions can be.

Personally I don't know about non-EU/UK countries with GDPR-style (or stronger) laws, so if I were operating a website that needed GDPR compliance (and decided to instead block visitors from the EU/UK), I probably would have no idea about needing to do something about visitors from your country.

So I expect their "true reasoning" is just ignorance.
by nearbuy | 2025-11-09 08:25:01+00:00
You're explaining the part I said I understood instead of the part I asked about. I don't see any reason computation would ever have to lead to true subjective consciousness instead of an externally identical philosophical zombie.

But the alternative is equally absurd. In essence, you have a bunch protons, neutrons and electrons pushing and pulling on each other and somehow that causes consciousness. There just aren't that many weird properties or particles to appeal to as a cause of consciousness. While there are exotic particles and the quarks and gluons that make up protons/neutrons, these particles are relevant for our study of the universe, but they aren't relevant to understanding the human brain. Abstracting protons as a single particle that push and pull on other particles via forces works fine for explaining everything we know about the brain.

Not that it really changes anything if the particular way quarks interact did affect the brain in a way that couldn't be explained through the simplified view of a proton. It adds a few more particles to consider and the weirdness of quantum chromodynamics, but nothing there explains consciousness either.

So how do you go from particles pushing and pulling on each other to consciousness? It seems to me no matter how you arrange a bunch of particles, there is never any reason to assume that arrangement is conscious. It's just a bunch of points moving according to a few simple rules.

If you're saying there is something more in physics, some other force or particle or currently unknown way particles interact that causes consciousness, that's roughly the soul particle idea.

Saying consciousness is caused by a physical process is very vague. What kind of process? Why don't the physical processes the computers running an LLM perform count? Why does the brain qualify? If we go on to build many different types of artificial brains (using silicon or biological cells or anything else), how would you even go about recognizing which artificial thinking machines have the required physical process for consciousness?
by danskeren | 2025-11-09 08:26:39+00:00
I throw all my queries at Grok 4 Expert, GPT 5 Thinking and Opus 4.1 Extended Thinking.. for Golang it's been my experience that Grok produce the best results about 90% of the time as well.

Some simple example:

https://claude.ai/share/6d178173-cdf7-4e50-a467-73ee9f479d56.

https://chatgpt.com/share/69102735-46ac-8012-9cf0-0969585c86....

https://grok.com/share/bGVnYWN5LWNvcHk%3D_54b5f2f1-732e-4372....

I don't use Gemini but haven't been impressed whenever I tried it with GitHub Copilot.
by jezek2 | 2025-11-09 08:27:05+00:00
That exists and it's called web apps. For native apps you need the exact opposite, access to everything otherwise it can't do the useful integrations and provide the best experience for the user, which is the point of native apps.

You have to trust native apps, as it always was the case. You can't just install random apps. You can delegate the trust to a curated lists of apps that you trust.

Or you can just use the web apps, but then you have to trust them too (so they don't misuse information about you or your data for example). But then it can't integrate with anything and many features are simply not available.

As for your example, a photo editor could need a network connection when it contains collaborative features. Or an auto-update system. Or downloading of assets on demand. Or cloud AI feature. Or list of add-ons to install. Or for license checks. Or online help/docs. Or whatever.
by cthalupa | 2025-11-09 08:28:59+00:00
Arguing against nonsense like this gets so exhausting.

Statins do not destroy your muscles. Newer statins make this already exceedingly rare side effect even rarer, but let's look at them as a general class:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36049498/

Blinded RCT/Meta-analysis shows about 11 complaints per 1k patient years, with 90% of them not actually being due to the statin. But because people act like they're common, they mistakenly believe it was the statin, which just reinforces this idea. And that's for muscle pain.

https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/atv.0000000000000073

https://academic.oup.com/eurjpc/article-abstract/26/5/512/59...

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15572716/

For actual significant muscle injury? Even lower. 1 or less per 10,000 patient years.

Effectively, you might get one muscle ache per year per 100 people and at most a 1 in 10,000 chance of serious myotoxicity.

As for diabetes, rosuvstatin usually has a neutral to positive impact on insulin sensitivity, and pitvastatin almost always has a positive impact. Some statins do have negative impact, but it's not universal.

It's not like duct tape on a leaking pipe - it's like removing items in a pipe that damage the pipe walls. Yeah, ideally they're not in the pipe to begin with, but removing them is better than letting them stay, and diet and exercise only do so much to remove said items.

Your body can synthesize LDL de novo in the organs that use it, and one of the heaviest users, the brain, can't get cholesterol out of your diet/serum levels at all - LDL cannot pass the blood brain barrier.

There are people with genetic mutations that mean they don't produce LDL, or at least not at high levels - their increased longevity and incredibly rare incidents of ASCVD is what drove the creation of PKCS9 inhibitors.

Statins also lower LDL-C levels - they don't make your body stop producing cholesterol in general, or even LDL-C. Even if your body couldn't make it on-demand where needed, statins aren't going to drop your serum levels to 0.
by AnthonyMouse | 2025-11-09 08:30:33+00:00
> Look up the brand perception of Amazon. It’s one of the highest in the business including high trust scores. High trust scores, for a company that sells counterfeit products! Perception is not reality.

Amazon for most of its history has had an extremely generous return policy. People don't trust them to send something good, they trust them to take it back if it's not.
by Epa095 | 2025-11-09 08:30:43+00:00
That's such a disappointment, I always had higher faith in the kites than the sails. Just seems easier to retrofit on existing ships witouth taking too much of the cargo capacity.

But are you sure they are bankrupt? The Internet claims "The company says the purpose of the acquisition, for which the price was not reported, is to strengthen the development and commercialization of “Seawing,” the automated kite system". That might be bs of course.

There also seems to be anther company trying it out, https://cargokite.com/
by autoexec | 2025-11-09 08:31:21+00:00
I think so, but that hasn't stopped it from being a popular way to gather data, or from often being the only source of data used in a paper. I get that internet surveys are dirt cheap and it's easy to get large number of responses, but you have to take the results with a such a massive boulder of salt that it seems more like a convenient way to churn out papers (or even an easy way to get a desired result) than a way to conduct actual worthwhile research.
by JumpCrisscross | 2025-11-09 08:32:34+00:00
> how to force GHG emissions externalities to the polluters

Not happening for decades. Not until America’s boomers, Xi and his wolf warriors and Putin and his circle are dead.

Solar is a success because it’s economically viable. We need more solutions like that. Not conference presentations wrapping a regressive carbon tax as a sailboat.
by eastbound | 2025-11-09 08:32:36+00:00
In 2013, they externalized the construction of the metal rings that make the body. It was supposed to be CNC’d, but the provider obviously made them manually, with all the mistakes that entails, including sloppy sawing and cutting holes in the wrong places. It was validated for production, because of political pressure to not blame the provider. Boeing re-cut the holes in the right places, making them twice weaker.

So yes, the MAX isn’t the first unsafe plane of Boeing. That it wasn’t proven that it caused accidents, doesn’t mean it was safe.

And there are countless other affairs like this. The lithium batteries.
by chao- | 2025-11-09 08:33:10+00:00
The best bit:

>Like I said, I don't wish Mark E. Zuckerberg any ill will at all. I hope the best for him, but let me tell you this: I will rule the search for "Mark Zuckerberg bankruptcy". And if he does fall upon difficult financial times, and happens to be in Indiana, I will gladly handle his case in honor of our eponymy.

According to the Algorithm Lords of my particular filter bubble, he does indeed rule the search results for "Mark Zuckerberg bankruptcy".
by Terr_ | 2025-11-09 08:33:22+00:00
Oof. Cybersecurity staff have been getting fired left and right recently, and the people doing the firing (i.e. OMB director Russel Vought) have even been praising the budget-shutdown situation as giving them an extra excuse to do it.

It's not a reactive decision to the situation either: Vought is a major author of the "Project 2025" plan from the Heritage Foundation, they've been just waiting to gut government cybersecurity for years.
by hoipaloi | 2025-11-09 08:33:35+00:00
you monkeypatch over core methods like that they put you in jail right away no trial, no nothing. Metaprogrammers... we have a special jail for metaprogrammers. You're global variabling? Right to jail. You're using for loops instead of iterators? To jail right away. You're type checking by class... Jail. Abusing eval? Jail. You're using global variables like a drunken sailor? You right to Jail. You overuse class variables Jail. You underuse class variables believe it or not jail. You use too many tests also Jail, overuse underuse. You use define method and you could have created the methods explicitly? Believe it or not, jail right away. We have the best code monkeys in the world because of jail.
by snvzz | 2025-11-09 08:33:48+00:00
The most important effort is seL4[0], the fastest OS kernel out there which also happens to be the most formally verified.

LionsOS[1] is its static scenario building framework, with some dynamic scenario support.

Genode[2] is an independent OS construction kit that can also use the seL4 kernel. Their general purpose OS, Sculpt, just had a very interesting multi-kernel release[3].

The systems group at ETHZürich is building Kirsch[4], an effort with seL4 and CHERI.

Managarm[5] is also building something of interesting architecture with some Linux software compatibility.

0, https://sel4.systems/

1. https://trustworthy.systems/projects/LionsOS/

2. https://genode.org/

3. https://genodians.org/alex-ab/2025-11-02-sculpt-multi-kernel

4. https://sockeye.ethz.ch/kirsch/

5. https://managarm.org/
by sebastiennight | 2025-11-09 08:34:09+00:00
> It's already a very profitable activity

For whom? Historically, aviation has not been a profitable industry over its lifetime[0]. The companies that still fly are basically just a combination of "survivorship bias" and "newbies still somehow subsidized".

We're looking at today's companies like you'd look at the half-season cast of Squid Game and thinking "this group seems to be thriving, I guess". That only works if you disregard everything that's happened before now and what will likely happen for the rest of the season.

[0]: https://aviationstrategy.aero/newsletter/Jun-2015/1/Airline-...
by mat0 | 2025-11-09 08:34:22+00:00
Good for you, Mark! I had a nice chuckle. On a more serious note, I really feel for the people that cannot get any kind of support and try to get some help by messaging "the owner" of the social network they are in. With big companies, you used to be able to get someone to talk to you when you had a problem. Not anymore. The best you can get is a well trained LLM
by whinvik | 2025-11-09 08:34:40+00:00
I feel finding 1 persona makes sense since otherwise you will have a messy time trying to build too many things.

However, I also think selecting that single persona too early will hamper you more than messy building will.

So its a balance. You have to do a wider search in the beginning, which will involve a few too many demo builds but once you find that single persona that feels like it can lead to big growth you stick to it.
by makeitdouble | 2025-11-09 08:36:02+00:00
On the "fake name" thing:

I felt guilty reading it, as in many past companies "Mark Zuckerberg" (and Bill Gates, and Tim Apple, Elon Musk etc) was indeed often used as a placeholder for test accounts and test data, and it never crossed my mind that we were basically training ourself to also treat a "Mark Zuckerberg" on our service as an account that escaped the sandbox or some other attack on the service.
by pjmlp | 2025-11-09 08:36:45+00:00
Only when removing everything that C++ adopts from C, other than low level implementation details that cannot be done in any other way.

That is what writing proper modern C++ is all about, anything else is writing C in C++.

Null terminated strings with pointer arithmetic instead of std::string and string_view, pointer arithmetic instead of std::span, bare pointer arrays instead of std::array and std::vector, C style casts,....
by goblin89 | 2025-11-09 08:40:01+00:00
Yes, TCAS II warns all the way down to 100m AGL (around 320ft above the ground), and they were already between 1000ft and 1500ft (~400m).

It may or may not have advised what to do (to climb/descent/etc.) because that is turned off below 1000ft, and they were approximately at that altitude at the time.
by padolsey | 2025-11-09 08:40:03+00:00
I help run an eval platform and thought it fun to try a bunch of models on this challenge [1].

There's some fun little ones in there. I've not idea what Llama 405B is doing. Qwen 30B A3B is the only one that cutely starts on the landscaping and background. Mistral Large & Nemo are just convinced that front shot is better than portrait. Also interesting to observe varying temperatures.

I feel like this SVG challenge is a pretty good threshold to meet before we start to get too impressed by ARC AGI wins.

[1] https://weval.org/analysis/visual__pelican/f141a8500de7f37f/...
by tkgally | 2025-11-09 08:40:48+00:00
A couple of days ago, inspired by Simon and those discussions, I had Claude create 30 such tests. I posted a Show HN with the results from six models, but it didn’t get any traction. Here it is again:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45845717

https://gally.net/temp/20251107pelican-alternatives/index.ht...
by pinkmuffinere | 2025-11-09 08:41:56+00:00
Having the same name as a famous person seems like a decent marketing benefit. And funnily enough, that’s achievable with some paperwork in many areas of the world! I wonder how/if this interacts with trademark (or other?) law. Can I change my name to Sundar Pichai? If so, then why haven’t a bunch of techbro founders done that already?
by skylurk | 2025-11-09 08:42:28+00:00
Those same 20000 TEU container ships are famously susceptible to being blown about by winds when they loose power.

The stronger argument is that wind is not consistent or reliable enough for logistics. At least, not without doing a lot of extra math.

So I agree that sail propulsion alone won't happen at large, but it's an interesting question of how far in that direction commercial shipping can go with modern technology.
by hamasho | 2025-11-09 08:42:32+00:00
Umm... I just discovered vibe-kanban[1] as a Kanban-based coding agent and superpowers[2] for brainstorming last week, and am planning to try it this weekend. And your product looks like the combination of both... It's interesting so I hope I'll have enough energy to try all of them, but my gut tells me I'll end up spending my weekend on my bed.

[1] https://github.com/BloopAI/vibe-kanban [2] https://github.com/obra/superpowers