MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by flatline | 2025-11-17 21:14:10+00:00
Through all their gyrations there is still something inherently contrived and performative to their interpersonal relationships that are far afield from normal, but pass well enough to permit connection. This line really resonated with me:

> I was going around dangling the possibility of emotional connection indiscriminately, ignoring the fact that it’s entirely reasonable to interpret this as flirtation.

I am still struggling to understand the way in which many people naturally form casual connections with others. In this example, a casual connection might be a hookup or a makeout session without it turning into a relationship. In another case from their article, it may be exchanging some personal stories at a house party without it turning into a four hour ordeal, or following up and developing a close, meaningful friendship. I perceive a lot of confusion here - and in my own life - about personal wants and needs being met, meeting someone else’s needs, where one’s personal boundaries lie, and how we effectively communicate them - or not.

In consent-forward spaces you get a lot of neurodivergent people using explicit verbal negotiation and agreement on everything, but this is a consent style that very much may not land well for people outside of one of those subcultures. Therapy and other trauma-informed modalities carry similar problems. It’s fine and great to develop subculture norms for the people participating in them, but it may not help them navigate the rest of the world. And yet, I’m not sure what else can be done. My social development mirrors the author’s, and I’m still unsatisfied with my results, even though I have more meaningful connections now than I used to, so this is not all without merit. It may just be the best that some people can do.
by cortesoft | 2025-11-17 21:14:16+00:00
> I find coding agents can produce very high quality tests if and only if you give them detailed guidance and good starting examples.

I find this to be true for all AI coding, period. When I have the problem fully solved in my head, and I write the instructions to explicitly and fully describe my solution, the code that is generated works remarkably well. If I am not sure how it should work and give more vague instructions, things don't work so well.
by greycol | 2025-11-17 21:14:41+00:00
I always thought of it as coming from side-channel. Which (until I searched just now and was only offered side channel attacks as a result) I generally construed it as a good thing because the system was assumed to be broken. Things like track 2 diplomacy or messaging the CEO/minister because customer service/bureaucracy was broken. You can go in the side door of a business if you own it or belong there, only dis-empowered customers are forced to go in the front.

Side loading was getting something to work because it should when the system hadn't caught up to the fact that it should work.
by throw0101c | 2025-11-17 21:14:41+00:00
> If you're a Linux sysadmin type, it's nice to stay in the same environment as your vms, kubernetes, docker/podman containers, etc.

I help sysadmin a few hundred servers, and given the choice I went with a MacBook because Terminal and SSH was good enough to admin stuff. MacOS is also pretty good with the business-y apps I have to deal with at times.

A colleague went with a x86 laptop and installed Ubuntu on it, and has regular issues with audio (Google Meeting, Zoom, etc), screen sharing (seems to be Wayland), etc.

At a previous job I had a Linux workstation under my desk and a Windows laptop, but with hybrid/remote I 'combined the two' into a Apple laptop.
by vee-kay | 2025-11-17 21:14:49+00:00
I know that Apple MFI certified Lightning cables work well with iDevices, but I found that third-party non-MFI-certified Lightning cables to be finicky with iDevices. But I never faced such problem with USB cables for non-Apple devices (Android phones, cameras, etc.).

Apple MFI certifies USB-C cables also, so I'm not sure if it is throttling its iDevices to be finicky with non-MFI USB-C cables.

I know for a fact that Apple did software updates to older iPhones to make them sluggish and drain battery quickly. I realised this when I went to Apple Genius Bar to get my iPhone 7 Plus battery replaced after it started draining too quickly daily, but even with new battery same problem persisted. The friendly staff member unofficially told me it is because of the recent software updates by Apple for older iPhones, and advised not to hold out hope that any future software update will fix the problem. Even a year later, his warning remained true. I gave away the iPhone to my nephew as a backup device for his studies, but he sold it soon, as it was a nightmare to keep charging it frequently.

Apple has faced multiple fines for deliberately slowing down older iPhones without informing users, including a €25 million fine in France and a $41 million fine for deceptive marketing practices. The company admitted to slowing down devices to prevent unexpected shutdowns due to aging batteries, but critics argued it was misleading.

These days, I wouldn't trust Apple with a barge pole, let alone the money from my wallet.
by joemi | 2025-11-17 21:14:52+00:00
Yeah, I agree. The size and price are attractive and they are pretty capable, but the UI is a bit more complex than ideal. It either needs better labeling of functions/combos (which is hard to do with the size) or more buttons/knobs to reduce the number of combos. On that note, the cases do a bit to aid with the labeling, but they also increase the price by more than one might expect. With better UI, they could have been truly amazing.
by johnnyanmac | 2025-11-17 21:15:30+00:00
>Who is really being inconvenienced?

The workers, drivers, and potentially future shoppers.

>I worked with at a grocery store loved going out and getting the carts.

You're getting the carts either way. I won't speak to if it helps to give you more time to yourself when collecting wayward carts, but there is some built in time for collections even with "good shoppers".

> if someone leaves their cart in a parking spot... well that is bad behavior

Yes, hence the shopping cart theory.

I'm not a perfect person but try to keep it out of parking those times I am tired. But I recognize that carts can still roll into the lot or that it increases risks of a future car who comes in.
by BurningFrog | 2025-11-17 21:15:31+00:00
Asking for supporting citations is a good LLM technique I was not aware of. Appreciate the tip!

And of course the process you're describing would result in a much better post, after much more work.

That said, those are good standards for scientific journals. To me, discussion posts in a hacker forum has a much lower bar, and I think I fulfilled my civic duties by saying it came from an AI.

I'll probably avoid it in the future though.
by MomsAVoxell | 2025-11-17 21:15:35+00:00
Literally a violation of Common Article 3; GC I Art. 12 & 18; GC III Art. 13; GC IV Arts. 27, 32 & 51; AP I Arts. 48, 51(2–5), 57 & 54; CCW Amended Protocol II Art. 7(2) of the Geneva Conventions.

Common Article 3 was breached by carrying out lethal attacks against persons taking no active part in hostilities (including off-duty medics and civilians) without individual assessment; GC I Articles 12 and 18 were violated when medical personnel and facilities were hit by exploding devices carried by wounded or off-duty health workers; GC III Article 13 was infringed because many victims instantly became hors de combat through injury yet were subjected to further maiming by shrapnel designed to cause maximum harm; GC IV Articles 27, 32 and 51 were contravened by the indiscriminate killing and mutilation of civilians (including children and bystanders) and by imposing collective punishment through mass, simultaneous detonation regardless of individual status; Additional Protocol I Articles 48, 51(2–5), 57 and 54 were violated through the failure to distinguish combatants from civilians, the inherently indiscriminate and disproportionate nature of detonating thousands of devices in populated areas, and the use of treachery/perfidious means to kill; finally, Amended Protocol II to the CCW Article 7(2) was directly breached by transforming ordinary civilian pagers into prohibited booby-traps specifically designed and constructed to contain concealed explosives.

The use of treachery/perfidious means to kill is particularly disturbing, since it sets the precedent for similar means to be used in retaliation, very likely to result in yet more unjustifiable acts of terror.
by cpill | 2025-11-17 21:15:40+00:00
yes, but why??? Your on the website and you have a link to the syndicated feed, for the website your on, and you want to make they feed look good in the browser... so they can click the link to the website _you are already on_??? The argument you should be looking at the feed XML in the browser instead of the website is bonkers. They are not meant to replace the website coz if they were why have the website?!
by toomuchtodo | 2025-11-17 21:15:40+00:00
Personally, I've invested ~500k EUR in a Portuguese Golden Visa fund invested in renewables (IRR is ~7-13%). Macro speaking, renewables investments keep hitting new records. I am convinced, and if you are not, I would strongly suggest consuming more data, because you appear to have a potential blind spot in your mental model on this topic.

https://about.bnef.com/insights/clean-energy/global-renewabl...

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2025-10-28/white-...
by cbmuser | 2025-11-17 21:16:06+00:00
»It could be but the US and EU have so far been unable to build commercial fission reactors without going 2x+ over budget in time and money.«

The EU also forgot how to build airports and train stations on budget and on time.

Should we stop building airports and train stations?

As for nuclear power plants: Germany and France built most of their reactors on budget and on time.
by etangent | 2025-11-17 21:16:10+00:00
> a lot of the points felt more like learning how to charm, manipulate, and game social interactions.

A lot of stuff "normal" people do is charm, manipulate, and game social interactions. Except because they are not conscious about it, we give them a pass. One of the characteristics of autistic-spectrum individuals is that they must make a conscious effort to achieve goals that are achieved unconsciously by most of us. If we prevent such individuals from learning all that rarely-written-down stuff consciously because it seems "distasteful" to us, then we are disadvantaging such individuals socially.
by phantasmish | 2025-11-17 21:16:22+00:00
> it relieves you of ever having to feel "smart" because you're always one saying the dumbest things, it's just that no one else was daring to say them

It’s actually had the opposite effect for me, of making everyone think I’m smarter.

It turns out that a lot of the time when nobody was mentioning the “obvious” solution or how we would avoid the “obvious” problem, it wasn’t because I was too dumb or inexperienced to know the implicit answer… but because actually nobody else in the room found those obvious. They’d not noticed at all.

You have to be careful with this, though. Nobody in management wants to hear why their process for collecting and/or analyzing “metrics” is flawed and renders the whole thing totally meaningless in ways that a slightly-bright high schooler who halfway paid attention is their science classes should be able to spot—in fact, the point was only to pretend to be “data driven”, not to do passable science (that’s way too expensive, companies are interested in doing it approximately never), in practically every case. All that stuff’s fake, and everyone’s just pretending it’s not, so pointing it out is gauche. Just nod along and don’t mention the blatant confounders that plausibly allow that the real trend line goes the other way. Or that to get a useful dataset they’ll need minimum two years of gathering data to even begin to draw conclusions… and we have not been collecting those data, so the timer starts now at best. Nobody cares, you’ve missed the point, which has nothing to do with actually learning things to guide decisions.
by cstrahan | 2025-11-17 21:16:29+00:00
What whoknowsidont is trying to say (IIUC): the models aren't trained on particular MCP use. Yes, the models "know" what MCP is. But the point is that they don't necessarily have MCP details baked in -- if they did, there would be no point in having MCP support serving prompts / tool descriptions.

Well, arguably descriptions could be beneficial for interfaces that let you interactively test MCP tools, but that's certainly not the main reason. The main reason is that the models need to be informed about what the MCP server provides, and how to use it (where "how to use it" in this context means "what is the schema and intent behind the specific inputs/outputs" -- tool calls are baked into the training, and the OpenAI docs give a good example: https://platform.openai.com/docs/guides/function-calling).
by m463 | 2025-11-17 21:16:41+00:00
In the US a lot of the bridge tolls are automated, or became automated during the pandemic. With no going back.

You either have to create and account and register your vehicles by license plate, or you get a toll in the mail that must be paid either by mail or online.

I got behind on a few of these and got fined, I think maybe 5x the price tacked on.

I would love to just pay in cash each time I use an infrequenlty-crossed bridge.
by indigodaddy | 2025-11-17 21:16:47+00:00
Have you considered the scenario of "everything is so dead in aws", that the check doesn't happen, plus the backends are dead too (this is assuming the backend services live in aws as well) ? But I'd guess in that case you'd know quickly enough from supplementary alerting (you guys don't seem the type to not have some sort of awesome monitoring in place) and you have a different/worse DR problem on your hands.

As far as the OP's point though, I'm going to probably assume that the health checks need to stay within/from AWS because 3rd party health checks could taint/dilute the point of the in-house AWS HC service to begin with.
by evanmoran | 2025-11-17 21:16:48+00:00
Iac is definitely a failure point, but the manual alternative is much worse! I’ve had a lot of benefit from using pulumi, simply because the code can be more compact than the terraform hcl was.

For example, for the fall over regions (from the article) you could make a pulumi function that parameterizes only the n things that are different per fall over env and guarantee / verify the scripts are nearly identical. Of course, many people use modules / terragrunt for similar reasons, but it ends up being quite powerful.
by cryptonector | 2025-11-17 21:17:34+00:00
Because you can allocate the activation record on the heap, provide a way to reify continuations, and presto! now you have call/cc (and trivially implemented, no less)!

Price paid: a) you need a GC (ok, whatever, sure, you have one), b) well, the performance hit of having to GC activation records (you don't care; others do), c) whoops, thread-safety got much harder and maybe you can't even have threads (imagine two threads executing in the same activation record at the same time!).

That's a very very steep price.
by CalRobert | 2025-11-17 21:18:21+00:00
Can you share a source? It doesn't match with my own reading (https://www.wpr.org/health/studies-show-pedestrian-fatalitie... for instance - """he average Halloween resulted in four additional pedestrian deaths, and the highest increase was among children. Pedestrians between 4 and 8 years old saw a 10-fold increase in fatalities on Halloween. Risk was highest around 6 p.m. and in residential neighborhoods.""")
by RichardCA | 2025-11-17 21:18:22+00:00
If you go back and watch the first two seasons of HBO's Westworld, you will see Anthony Hopkins' character repeatedly doing exposition dumps out of his mouth. The difference is in how he does it, that he is in such complete command of his craft that he can work out exactly what the screenwriters intended without drawing any attention to it.

And Trekkies will remember the time Larry Niven wrote a screenplay for TAS and gave all the exposition dumps to Leonard Nimoy. See how nicely he handles it?

https://youtu.be/B65HEhBR-1s
by mcrider | 2025-11-17 21:18:47+00:00
Same, I recently got into Arduino so i could build a toy idea I had for my kid (a sort of "keepy-uppy" paddle game). I've always avoided Arduino projects because I don't like to code in my spare time (its my day job) and also learning how to wire things seemed daunting -- LLMs solved both of those problems for me (Claude's wiring tutorials are awesome and the code is simple enough that it can one-shot it).

I also bought a Bambu A1 3D Printer and it is unexpectedly way more fun and useful than I thought it would be. I designed the toy in TinkerCAD and it printed out beautifully (I also have been printing out lots of other toys and yes, useful things for around the house and for other projects).

Next steps are learning Fusion 360 and figuring out PCBs -- That also seemed daunting to me but its nice to see other amateur hobbyists are seemingly picking it up with not much difficulty.
by cookiengineer | 2025-11-17 21:19:00+00:00
You are assuming that DDoS is signal. It's not, it's the noise.

The idea of DDoS for hire is to bury your own tracks in as much network requests as possible, so that the other side is overwhelmed processing (or even storing) that dataset and won't find out what the real target was.

That's literally the strategy of APT28/29.
by MomsAVoxell | 2025-11-17 21:19:20+00:00
Says you, and that is too easy:

“The IDF attacks civilians. It uses perfidy to indiscriminately attack the civilian population of its enemies. It, too, ignores the laws of war.”

There is no way to continue justifying acts of terror being committed by your in-group, without also become equivalent to the terrorist of your out-group.
by rayiner | 2025-11-17 21:19:55+00:00
> At some point I realized I was in the opposite camp and nothing I have seen since that has really changed my view point.

I'm in this camp as well. The additional machinery required to make library features pluggable often adds a lot of complexity to the user-visible semantics of the language. And it's often not so easy to limit that complexity to only the situations where the user is trying to extend the language.

That's not always true. Sometimes the process of making seemingly core features user-replaceable will reveal simpler, more fundamental abstractions. But this article is a good example of the opposite.
by toast0 | 2025-11-17 21:20:18+00:00
> As long as spammers keep paying telecoms & no law(s) forbidding this exist, it will continue.

That's the trick. A lot of countries bill calls to cell phones at 10 cents a minute; in the US, calling is near zero cost. The US makes a great market for scammers to target because of low operating costs, penetration of globally usable payment cards, minimal language diversity.

Of course, these scams are forbidden by law, but that doesn't change the economics. Very few scam shops get busted; especially when most of them run from outside the US. STIR/SHAKEN helps a bit, but not much... without a effective mechanism to report unwanted calls that leads to those callers being ejected from the network as well as ejecting providers that are unresponsive to reports, there's not really hope of progress.
by nine_k | 2025-11-17 21:20:22+00:00
The author dismisses many entries, saying "it's a programming language, I want a config language, or I'd use Javascript". I completely disagree with the author, given my experience.

- You want bits of programmability in your config language. Else you end up with copy-pasting pieces and adding comments like "must be the same value as foo.bar below!". This sucks enough that you may end up with a config generator for some custom meta-config language, which you need to produce and maintain. You very certainly need symbolic constants, it's great to have simple arithmetics and string concatenation, and ideally you need a way to map a config fragment over a list.

- You don't want a Turing-complete language as your config language. You also don't want to allow any I/O or other effects in that language. You don't want to allow your config parser to do anything but to form a tree of keys and values in memory after reading the config. Javascript is right out. XML is also right out, because entities allow for external resource links, that is, uncontrolled I/O; this was a source of many exploits.

- Nevertheless, you want your configs to be modular when needed, allowing to graft into your main config imported values from some common templates, specific overrides, etc. Direct inclusion is a poor but serviceable approach.

- You want the values in your config be typed. They can be strings by default to save some typing. But you want your config parser to be able to complain when you write a string instead of a number, of a float instead of an integer, or an integer out of representable range (the bane of large numbers in JSON), or a date that cannot be parsed, or a null for a value that cannot be null. This saves you from a ton of nasty surprises when configs are updated.

- You want your config language to have explicit delimiters, so that incompletely copy-pasted constructs would be detected. Hence YAML is a bad choice, JSON5 is a much better choice.

- Of course, you absolutely want comments. JSON is a serialization format, not a human-operated config format.

This is why, I think, CUE, Dhall, and Jsonnet are doing more or less the right thing, but they are a tad large. Maybe something simpler and more compact exists, with some limited programmability and easy syntax.
by cyanydeez | 2025-11-17 21:20:29+00:00
we've alreaaaay seen that decentralization is an abstract, butnot a reality.

There will always be a move towards centralization when a project gains enough converts because the bulk of concerns are exactly the same but we don't have n+1 people willing to do the necessary legwork to secure.

As such, just like REST apis and their N+1 query problem, forcing everyone to have a security conscious posture is never going to happen.

You absolutely need centralized authorities; what the real argume is about is how that authority is selected, changed and intermediated. The same way we argue about how a stable RAFT algorithm operates.

Move on from this "decentralization is all we need" argument. It's failed and failing.
by zzo38computer | 2025-11-17 21:20:53+00:00
Yes, what I meant (one way to handle what the author proposed; possibly not exactly what they meant) is that many of these "building blocks" can be made from wasm (although I have some criticism of that too, nevertheless, it will do), and many will be included by default, and others would be set up by the user if desired. Native code extensions (e.g. .so files) would also be possible but is not needed for most things, and if you set up from the app store or from stuff specified by the document or server then only sandboxed VM codes would be possible and native codes would not be allowed in those circumstances.