MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by nly | 2025-11-30 10:23:58+00:00
Read what I wrote again. I said all member functions.

Reusing of a moved from object only requires assignment and destruction to be well behaved.

The std library containers give you extra guarantees (a moved from object is effectively the same as a default constructed one), but the _language_ imposes no such requirements on your types

It's perfectly allowed by the language for the .size() member of your own vector type to return a random value after it's been moved from because you wanted to save 1 CPU instruction somewhere.
by quapster | 2025-11-30 10:25:37+00:00
Meshtastic is interesting because it's basically "LoRa-first networking" instead of "internet with some radios attached." Most consumer radios are still stuck in the mental model of walkie-talkies, while Meshtastic treats RF as an IP-like transport layer you can script, automate, and extend. That flips the stack: your primary network can be intermittent, off-grid, and low bandwidth, and the internet becomes an optional upgrade instead of a dependency.

The bigger story is that this is what "local-first" looks like in the physical world. Phones are powerful computers that are useless as soon as the tower or backhaul goes down; a $20 LoRa board suddenly becomes the only reliable "infrastructure" in range. Once enough people carry something Meshtastic-compatible, you get the weird inversion where the cheapest, dumbest devices are the ones that keep working when the expensive, smart ones don't.
by TrackerFF | 2025-11-30 10:25:41+00:00
I see your point, but as it is stated in the article, it is one of those techniques that require practice, and time to mature. And like it mentions, it's a bit like chess...when you're presented with some troubling integral, you can parametrize it in a number of ways. Most will bring you back to the beginning (like with the standard integration by parts), but the right one will make your life much easier.

It can be frustrating when math does not have any clear single path, but that's just the nature of the beast. In the beginning you'll just have to explore all the paths, but do that a couple of hundred times, and you'll start to notice patterns and what will work / what will not. Kind of like chess, where a good chess player can think N moves ahead in time.
by vidarh | 2025-11-30 10:26:25+00:00
Ruby has had "officiak" type annotations since 3.0.0 via RBS.

Exactly because of the concerns you described, RBS originally used only separate files for the type annotations, so it can be selectively and gradually applied. You can add Ruby signatures inline as comments as well, but frankly both options looks ugly, and so does many of the alternatives like Sorbet signatures.
by locknitpicker | 2025-11-30 10:28:19+00:00
> As inefficient as encoding everything into the URI is, I really enjoy being able to bookmark and share specific filter configuration.

That is perfectly fine. Sites that support path- and query-based filters are already designed specifically to have filters embedded in links, which are GET requests. The QUERY method is something more in line of a GraphQL style of query that isn't held back by the semantics of a POST request. GraphQL didn't invented this API style. If GraphQL-style APIs didn't affected how WebApps implemented links, QUERY methods won't.
by klez | 2025-11-30 10:31:16+00:00
> the open-source community gets to make use of it as they please

Uhm... I wouldn't be so sure. Looks to me like such a license carries transitively to projects that depend on your software.

Suppose you're distributing a library on such terms. Then an open source project uses your library. Such a project can't then be used in a commercial fashion unless whoever distributes it gets a commercial license from the library's copyright owner. Now suppose the project uses multiple libraries with such terms. That's a burden.

Then again this may be a feature, not a bug, of the model you're proposing.

I suppose that it wouldn't work in practice, though. The AGPL license (and libraries with a GPL license instead of a LGPL one) aren't really widespread, probably because of the virality clause.
by anticensor | 2025-11-30 10:31:42+00:00
> Linux is incompatible with client anti-cheat because there is no security boundary that can't be sidestepped with a custom compiled kernel. Windows is Windows, with known APIs and ways to read process memory that can be monitored. Secure boot means only Microsoft's own built kernels can boot and you now have a meaningful security boundary. Monitor what kernel drivers are loaded and you can make it harder for cheaters to find ways in. Sure you can run in a VM, but you can also detect when it happens.

OK I'll just compile a custom ReactOS build that lets me sidestep that boundary.
by lurk2 | 2025-11-30 10:31:44+00:00
> I figure it's an emergent property based on the self-selected group who join the respective organizations plus some exposure to new ideas.

There are plenty of conservatives interested in anthropology; there’s no reason to think they’ve self-selected out of the pool, so then we have to consider if conservatives enter the field but are exposed to new ideas such that none remain conservatives for long (this seems unlikely), or that these departments have been taken over by people who explicitly use their influence within these departments to promote certain narratives; this is far more likely as they have been explicitly stating that this is what they are doing for decades now.

This theory is further corroborated by where you see this bias; it’s the least pronounced in quantitative, technical fields (mathematics, engineering, chemistry), and most pronounced in fields that are almost completely qualitative.
by sublinear | 2025-11-30 10:31:54+00:00
> Leaders can now validate assumptions, explore design directions, parse logs, and reason about architecture faster than ever ... You can be technical today without being deep in code every hour of the day.

No they can't. I've never seen this go well. The use of AI in this way will merely start a conversation with your devs and if you insist on your opinions based on what the AI told you you're going to lose massive amounts of trust with your team.

> ICs can operate at a higher strategic level without getting bogged down in mechanical work.

ICs have always been forced to be strategic with their architecture and specific technical decisions only to get the credit taken away from them by upper management when it goes well and play defense in the blame game when it doesn't go so well. Nothing has changed.
by figassis | 2025-11-30 10:32:20+00:00
To add a little bit to this and why I am so principled against this. I will subscribe to a service, because a service means ongoing work. If you spent months or years building software, and have finished it, charge people what you believe is fair for the work you did up to now. Charge $50, charge $500, your call, sell to 1M people, your call. You have no running costs, you're just selling an app.

If you were running this on some cloud, maybe had some other extras built in that cost you time and money, then there could be a subscription.

If you want to keep your software updated, and are pushing updates daily, weekly, monthly, etc, I could squint at a subscription, but I would rather you just do critical fixes (bc if your product is broken you do owe paying customers a fix without a charge), and put new features in a new version that you will also sell.

People are selling git clients, calculators, db clients on subscription. it's crazy what the world has come to. We don't work to pay you guys rent.

The second I saw this app I was about to click buy (looking for a table plus alternative), went to pricing, saw subscription and immediately dropped it without even trying the free version.
by elliotnunn | 2025-11-30 10:34:23+00:00
This is a good point. For a while, I was writing vintage Mac hacking tools in ANSI C [1].

The answer is that it's too hard. I want to see the Happy Mac on as much exotic hardware as possible, but my day job keeps me very busy, and I want to enjoy my hobby without tedium and toil. I prefer to use a language that is "easier to write, easier to read, easier to understand, easier to maintain" [2].

[1] https://github.com/elliotnunn/mac-rom/blob/master/Tools/Tool... [2] https://commandcenter.blogspot.com/2012/06/less-is-exponenti...
by StephenHerlihyy | 2025-11-30 10:35:36+00:00
It’s not about putting data centers into orbit. It’s about the cost-yield inversion to data centers cooling infrastructure that happens at terawatt scale. All things being equal - a chilled circuit performs better and produces less heat than a hot one. There is a high up front cost to pre-cooling but if you can get in the -60C range, and stay there, you can increase performance and cut energy costs.

When they say data centers in space - they mean data centers you can’t get to because they are flooded with ultra cold dielectric fluid and it costs tens of millions of dollars to bring them back up to human temperatures.

Right now it’s not worth the hassle. At terawatt scale it’s almost mandatory.

When you walk down that line it’s pretty close to putting them in space. No access. Super cold. No air. Tiny, insulated capsule. Thermal management hell. They’ll be buried in mines though, not launched into orbit.

It’s just corporate propaganda to simplify an otherwise insane situation.
by KaiserPro | 2025-11-30 10:36:24+00:00
1) ISS is about 30 years old. It's hardly the state of the art in solar technology.

Domestic solar panels are heavy, and dont need to deal with hypersonic sand blasting. even at that height, you are in shadow every 90 minutes.

> 3) The article complains about lack of bandwidth. Star Link serves millions of customers with high speed, low latency internet via thousands of satellites.

Right. First power and heat are a massive pain to deal with. You need megawatts to run a datacentre. A full rack of GPUs (48u, 96 GPUs) is around 40-70kw. It also weighs a literal ton.

You also need to be able to power that in the time when you are in darkness. BUT! when you are zooming around the earth every 90 minutes, you can't maintain a low latency connection, because the distance between you and the datacentre.

That means geostationary, as that solves most of your power issues, but now you have latency and bandwidth issues. (oh and power, inverse square law and bandwidth are related)

> 5) Learning effects

Great, but it gets us nothing.
by craighay1 | 2025-11-30 10:39:20+00:00
Really the only potential upside to this, and it's a niche one, is for time or security sensitive compute tasks where the raw data originates in orbit. Every happens over inter satellite link and there's no downlink to Earth until the end of the process (downlink is still a problem as Earth is mostly ocean and wilderness)

E.g. one satellite's wide area sensor payload is processed and "potential wildfire detected". The result is passed to another satellite with finer grained sensing capabilities which is due to pass over in the next X minutes which then tees up a capture.
by fzeroracer | 2025-11-30 10:39:21+00:00
I'm sorry but this timeline and story makes zero sense. For reference, 2014 is about a year before gay marriage was fully legalized in the US and reasonably before the whole trans rights movement started being a lot more public. I went to college in a deep blue state and had practically little to no interaction with any transgender folks, both in my gen eds classes and just overall at that same time period. Someone arriving as a guest speaker and talking in the way you've mentioned would've instantly made headlines in 2014, especially since at least one student would've complained and made it a bigger issue which as far as I can tell it doesn't exist. Nor are there any mentions of said guest speaker, and colleges are generally very public about this sort of thing.
by chrisandchris | 2025-11-30 10:39:58+00:00
This reminds me of may of one of my favourite piece of software, Mail PassView, which is (AFAIK) considered Malware bei Windows/Defender because it shows you the passwords you entered yourself in Outlook (but forgot to write down somehwere).

Flagging Malware is hard, and research/dev tools are always behaving at least similar to Malware (because we want to get data/do stuff regular users won't do).
by seba_dos1 | 2025-11-30 10:40:14+00:00
It is high, but it's not extreme. 50k IU just once is an equivalent of about 7000 IU daily for a week, which won't really move the needle much if you're seriously deficient (in fact, it's still within what's considered a safe daily dose for healthy people - you can produce more than that from sunlight alone). You can feel free to take your "hammer" weekly, no deficiency required.

When I took >5000 IU daily for three months, I only raised 25(OH) D level in my blood from 9 to 30 ng/ml, and there's no evidence of toxicity below 150 ng/ml.

Of course, when dealing with high doses you need to keep your levels in check, as absorption can differ between individuals.
by locknitpicker | 2025-11-30 10:40:53+00:00
> Making GET requests have bodies as the norm would also handle this

The RFC is pretty clear that no participant in a HTTP request is expected to even allow a GET request through. RFC 9110 even states quite clearly that it's even a potential request smuggling attack. Some major cloud providers provide API Gateway implementations that outright strip request bodies from GET requests.

I think you are missing the whole point of proposing a new HTTP verb. Changing the semantics of a GET request is not an option because of both the security risks it presents and the fact that the infrastructure of the whole internet either is designed to reject these requests or outright breaks. See how GET requests are cached and how cache implementations don't discriminate GET requests based on it's request body.
by forinti | 2025-11-30 10:40:54+00:00
This book got a bad reputation in Brazil because a famous actress (who supposedly isn't very bright) once said it was her favourite book.

When I finally decided to give it a try, I found it to be a very interesting read.

So, you can bet people who show disdain for it probably haven't read it. Or they have weak character and are afraid to be considered dumb by association.
by viraptor | 2025-11-30 10:40:56+00:00
> Why would I want my DEI consulting to actually solve the underlying problem

This applies to any consulting. Normally you want to solve a problem, because there's another thousand of companies that need similar problem solved. You don't get many people coming into a company with an immediate "I'm going to try to not improve anything" plan.

> The left-extremists say "you need to give me a job in order to make your team more diverse".

This is seriously weird even as a misrepresentation. The extreme left is for changing diversity overall rather than just "give me a job". (If we actually go extreme left, it would be closer to "we've got enough resources for everyone to not need jobs to survive" anyway)

The overproduction issue is interesting, but it really didn't need the exaggerated caricatures as examples.
by BanditDefender | 2025-11-30 10:40:58+00:00
"Mathematicial superintelligence" is so obnoxious. Why exactly do they think it is called an Erdős problem when Erdős didn't find the solution? Because Erdős discovered the real mathematics: the conjecture!

These people treat math research as if it is a math homework assignment. There needs to be an honest discussion about what the LLM is doing here. When you bang your head against a math problem you blindly try a bunch of dumb ideas that don't actually work. It wastes a lot of paper. The LLM automates a lot of that.

It is actually pretty cool that modern AI can help speed this up and waste less paper. It is very similar to how classical AI (Symbolica) sped up math research and wasted less paper. But we need to have an honest discussion about how we are using the computer as a tool. Instead malicious idiots like Vlad Tenev are making confident predictions about mathematical superintelligence. So depressing.
by pjmlp | 2025-11-30 10:41:48+00:00
I can relate to Odersky, similar to him, while I appreciate Niklaus Wirth's work, I don't appreciate the quest to minimalism that he went down after Oberon.

For me the right path is Oberon => Oberon-2 and Component Pascal => Zonnon and Active Oberon.

Yes, I know he wasn't directly evolved with those ones.

I see the several revisions of Oberon-07 as an entertaining exercise in minimalism, which fails to understand the industry.

Something that Niklaus Wirth complained about in his rant about Software Engineering, not understanding why Java and C++ and not Oberon won the hearts of companies.

I was fortunate to attend his Oberon session on Oberon Day at CERN, 20 years ago, while a genius programming language designer, expecting software engineers to recognise great design and naturally embracing it, was expecting too much.
by VBprogrammer | 2025-11-30 10:42:00+00:00
I stick to Anker for cables, batteries and chargers. I'm sure they've had their own issues but everything I've bought feels well made. The only one I've had an issue with was a USB-C to everything else adaptor which weirdly stopped working after a week or two. I was surprised to find that their support was based in the UK (Cardiff if memory serves) and very efficiently processed a return and replacement.

I've watched Big Clive's videos for too long to trust no-name Chinese things with anything involving mains potential or energy storage.
by tim333 | 2025-11-30 10:42:16+00:00
The pricing doesn't really work like that - it's more an auction amongst different companies wanting to sell their services so the price comes down to how much the companies make from customers acting on the ads. Which is why you have to pay crazy money to advertise a mortgage for example - the mortgage companies make a lot if they sell one. I think OpenAI could do well at it.
by pjmlp | 2025-11-30 10:46:04+00:00
Any language pushed by Android overload has a shot at Android.

Kotlin would be irrelevant on the JVM space otherwise, only something being pushed by Jet Brains that some folks play with outside the company.

There would not exist a Kotlin Foundation which is basically Jet Brains in bed with Google.

I keep waiting for the announcement of Google's acquisition from Jet Brains.
by locknitpicker | 2025-11-30 10:46:25+00:00
> If you look at the summary table, the only difference between a GET and a QUERY is that the query can have a body. Other than that, they have the exact same characteristics and purpose, so there isn’t really a need to semantically separate them.

This is outright false. RFC9110, which clarifies semantics of things like GET requests, is clear on how GET requests should not have request bodies because it both poses security issues and breaks how the web works.

Just because your homemade HTTP API expects a GET request packs a request body, that does not mean any of the servers it hits between your client and your server will. Think about proxies, API gateways, load balancers, firewalls, etc. Some cloud providers outright strip request bodies from requests.

The internet should not break just because someone didn't bothered to learn how HTTP works. The wise course of action is to create a new method with specific semantics that are clear and actionable without breaking the world.
by AnthonyMouse | 2025-11-30 10:47:31+00:00
The title of the link indeed says "the majority of the San Francisco Bay Area" but it also says that the largest of them owns 293 buildings, so for twelve times that to be a majority there would have to be no more than about five thousand total properties in the San Francisco Bay Area.

Meanwhile the Chronicle says there are about 2.3 million total properties, I couldn't find them repeating the claim that those 12 landlords represent a majority but they did say that "this list of 12 includes some of the region’s major power players in residential real estate, housing tens of thousands of families". Which I wouldn't expect to be a majority of the >7 million people who live there.
by neko-kai | 2025-11-30 10:48:30+00:00
Given that Scala-Android efforts predate Kotlin, Scala could have had a shot at Android if EPFL resources were allocated to it, like to Scala.js.

Kotlin is not simple at all, it has a lot of keywords for strange and very specific features and corner cases, it's hard to remember them all. Moreover, the Intellij Kotlin plugin is somehow slower than Scala's despite being a 1st party language and not having implicits, how they managed to achieve that is a mystery.
by ffsm8 | 2025-11-30 10:49:22+00:00
I totally get that and personally would never hold that against him. Nor did I interpret it as a threat.

However, this comment chain was of how vulnerable non commercial projects like it are to outside factors making causing exactly this issue, making further maintenance on the project infeasible... Consequently ending it, effectively.

There is no blame in play here. haunter merely quoted this as a reason for why theyre worried about it longevity - and considering there was a discussion about an upstream change which would've realized his worry... It seems not at all misrepresented?

Fwiw, I personally don't share the same worry as haunter, because I don't see the chosen distribution nor OS as a significant investment. I feel comfortable switching things around occasionally
Show HN: Veritas OS – Local OS for LLM Governance
by VERITAS_OS_JP | 2025-11-30 10:49:32+00:00
I built a completely local, file-based “operating system” that treats any LLM as a dangerous superintelligence that must be governed.

Every decision is forced through: • Evidence → Critique → Debate → Planner • ValueCore (ethics/legality/risk scoring) • FUJI Gate (mandatory pre/post safety filter) • SHA-256 hash-chained TrustLog (tamper-proof audit) • Doctor Dashboard (auto-immune system)

No cloud. Single user. Runs on a laptop.

Think of it as the first real immune system + constitution for proto-AGI agents.

Code: https://github.com/veritasfuji-japan/veritas_os Paper (DOI): https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17688094

Would love brutal feedback from the HN crowd.
by auggierose | 2025-11-30 10:50:26+00:00
Yes, factorial_10_hardcoded convinces me that RUNTIME is not a good idea, although it works actually as RUNTIME is supposed to work: Hardcoding the computed value for a given input is the ultimate optimisation.

Not sure about the factorial_hardcoded_a_b example, because you still need to get rid of the existential somehow, maybe via skolemisation b[n], but that does not really matter in light of factorial_10_hardcoded.

The typing rules for RUNTIME would have been simply that if f has type a_1 => ... => a_n => b for n >= 1, and x_i has type a_i, then RUNTIME f x_1 ... x_n has type b.

That would exclude the clearly problematic case RUNTIME x for n = 0, but it seems to me hardcoding is basically how you can get that case back in via extensionality.
by kotaKat | 2025-11-30 10:50:44+00:00
> silhouette software is proprietary

To an exteeeeeeeent. I will point out that Silhouette is owned by Graphtec (who makes normal commercial cutters).

You can get a very smooth upgrade path going from a Silhouette machine to a Graphtec machine running Silhouette software to then moving designs into the Graphtec packages.

Otherwise... yeah. Silhouette machine driven with the Inkscape plugin is 100% the way to go to handle cutting.