MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by andsoitis | 2025-11-25 16:11:20+00:00
When we consider that our brain creates our interface to the world via senses, predictive modeling, and learning, vs. "seeing the world directly as it is", it stands to reason that evolution by natural selection has favored certain configurations that make the human organism more successful than not. Our brains "simulate" the world in a way that is useful for the human organism to be successful in it.
by jswelker | 2025-11-25 16:11:29+00:00
I know this is a rhetorical question, but... yes? As a parent I absolutely am going to make sacrifices to help my kids get through college, and one is planning for med school. I feel like many immigrant parents have this mentality. It is the native born who do not. (Native born white guy here looking at all my family and acquaintances)
by bjourne | 2025-11-25 16:11:56+00:00
The big deal is that you are coerced into giving up extremely detailed and personal information. Your face at a security checkpoint or gate does not look identical to your face on your passport. Happy, sad, frustrated, tired? Last time you shaved? Stubble or beard? Hair in a mess? Glasses? Use and style of makeup (for women)? Dental status? Stained teeth? If you're dumb enough to smile or if they force you to in the future (for "security reasons")? One or more pimples?

All of the above is contained in a SINGLE photo. MULTIPLE such photos every time you fly tell a whole lot about you. Way more than I'm comfortable giving up to companies and governments I don't trust will handle the data responsibly.
by iteria | 2025-11-25 16:12:10+00:00
This depends on the kid. I tried for literal years to get my kid to read. Nothing works. It doesn't matter what games I picked. What context she has to read, books, comics, video games, real life. It was not happening.

You know what kick started my kid's ability to read? A reading teacher sitting with her every single day and teaching her explicitly the drudgery of what reading was. And then me doing the same at home.

Rote is for kids like this and a lot of kids have areas like this. No my kid doesn't need as much math facts practice as she gets. But her cousin? That kid isn't learning anything without doing lines about how to add.
by hobofan | 2025-11-25 16:12:56+00:00
Congrats on the launch!

We are building a competing open source tool[0] with a very similar focus (strongly relying on interoperable standards like MCP; built for enterprise needs, etc.), though bootstrapping with customers rather than being VC funded. It's nice to see a competitor in the field following similar "OSS Friends" principles, while many of the other ones seem to have strong proprietary tendencies.

(Small heads up: The "view all integrations" button goes to a 404)

[0] https://erato.chat/
by alephnerd | 2025-11-25 16:12:58+00:00
> And the EU pharma companies package it, slap their logos on it and make mega profits selling domestically

Yep.

> Why do you think that is?

Because European nations lacks the linkages needed to build a competitive electronics industry.

Much of the industry is heavily linked across the Pacific, with the US, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and Singapore transferring technology, capital, and personnel across borders to setup supply chains.

This is different with biopharma, given how closely connected European majors are with American subsidiaries. It also really doesn't hurt that much of American pharma has historically been consolidated in Greater Boston and the Delaware region which is just across the Atlantic, and European biopharma players have acted as the technology, capital, and personnel partner for developing these industries in India and China (though both do still prefer American players because of better budgets and more bleeding edge IP).

Additionally, where leadership are from matters as well. In the 1970s to 1990s, much of the electronics and software industry's mid-level and upper level leadership was West Coast based, Israel, or Asian in origin, which meant linkages were built much earlier, such as Morris Chang (Texas Instruments), Jason Chang (IllinoisTech), Vinod Dham (Intel), Dov Frohman (Intel), Kim Choong-Ki (Fairchild), Gurpreet Singh (Continental Electronics), etc. Heck, Intel began packaging semiconductors in Malaysia all the way back in 1973 - decades before they initiatited similar investments in Ireland.

The only European company that had a similar size and scope of American or Asian companies in the electronics industry was Philips NV before it broke up, but it was never at the size and scale of American Apple, IBM, or HP or Japanese Sony, Toshiba, or Sharp - let alone their Korean challengers in the 2000s like Samsung, SK Hynix, or Hyundai or their Chinese challengers in the 2010s like Huawei, TCL, Xiaomi, etc.

Most European countries lack the same bench of diaspora in leadership positions in large swathes of innovation industries. You'll easily find European leaders in services industries along with biopharma, but you'd never find a similar clustering in software, hardware, and even increasingly in biopharma to a certain extent.

Heck, most Indians who attend a Max Plank Institute for biopharma related work now return to India with a professorship or to lead an India- or America-located lab for a major like Novartis, GSK, etc.
by zwnow | 2025-11-25 16:13:06+00:00
Yea I get that. A partner would be nice but in 30 years of my life I met 2 women I liked. I am extremely self aware in that regard. I am repulsed by modern dating and dating apps and I dont get myself "out there". I also have way too high standards but I cant just ignore them. Also being chronically depressed does not really help either...

So I just accept my situation and I don't want to change my ways as I am content with how my life currently is.
by dangus | 2025-11-25 16:13:43+00:00
I haven’t given Microsoft a dime since Windows 7. Users who buy a computer have the OS preinstalled. Millions of people never activate it. The product is effectively free.

It’s a commercial OS but people can’t get over it. There isn’t a single commercial OS out there that doesn’t try to sell you something at some point.

Maybe that is unacceptable to you and I respect you for that. But it’s a commercial OS and always has been.

What gets annoying is when these aspects conflate it to being a bad OS or some monstrously unethical system. Seeing some ads that are easily disabled is treated by a certain community like the Microsoft is selling blood diamonds. The ferver doesn’t match the magnitude of the crime.
by norir | 2025-11-25 16:13:43+00:00
Parsing is strange in that many people tend to believe it is a solved problem and yet every project handles it slightly differently (and almost none do it truly well).

I have been studying compiler design for several years and I have found that writing a simple parser by hand is the best way to go most of the time. There is a process to it: You start with a "Hello, world!" program and you parse it character by character with no separate lexer. You ensure that at each step in your parser, you make an unambiguous decision at each character and never backtrack. The decision may be that you need to enter a disambiguation function that also only moves forward. If the grammar gets in the way of conserving this property, change the grammar not the parser design.

If you follow that high level algorithm, you will end up with a parser with performance linear in the number of characters which is asymptotically as well as you can hope to do. It is both easy and simple to implement (provided you have solid programming fundamentals) and no caching is needed for efficiency.

Deliberate backtracking in a compiler is an evil that should be avoided at all costs. It is potentially injecting exponentially poor performance into a developer's primary feedback loop which is a theft of their time for which they have little to no recourse.
Show HN: fast-check-frontend – Property-based testing for UI components
by damnhotuser | 2025-11-25 16:13:49+00:00
Hey there,

Since I learned about property-based testing a couple of years ago, I always wondered: whouldn't it be a nice fit for testing unpredictable systems such as frontend components?

Most of the bugs we stumble upon as frontend devs are related to usecases we did not think about while developing our components, or while testing it. The idea of fast-check-frontend is basically to generate sequences of random (yet customizable) user interactions (clicks, keyboards events, scrolls, hovers, etc...), to dispatch them to DOM elements, and to validate invariants (things that should always be true after interactions).

The lib is framework agnostic, should work with any test-runner (only tried with Jest yet), and relies on the shoulder giants: fast-check and @testing-library.

This is still WIP, but any constructive feedbacks would still be appreciated.
by quux0r | 2025-11-25 16:14:05+00:00
While I don’t disagree that this is at first blush quite complex, using it as an example also obscures a few additional details that aren’t present in something like python, namely monads and lifetimes. I think in absence of these, this code is a bit easier to read. However, if you had prior exposure to these concepts, I think that this is more approachable. I guess what I’m getting at here is that rust doesn’t seem to be syntactic spaghetti as much as it is a confluence of several lesser-used concepts not typically used in other “simpler” languages.
by hedora | 2025-11-25 16:14:13+00:00
People that don't understand make are destined to recreate it poorly, and there's no better example than cmake, imho.

Here's my arc through C/C++ build systems:

- make (copy pasted examples)

- RTFM [1]

- recursive make for all sorts of non-build purposes - this is as good as hadoop up to about 16 machines

- autotools

- cmake

- read "recursive make considered harmful" [2]

- make + templates

Anyway, once you've understood [1] and [2], it's pretty hard to justify cmake over make + manual vendoring. If you need windows + linux builds (cmake's most-advertised feature), you'll pretty quickly realize the VS projects it produces are a hot mess, and wonder why you don't just maintain a separate build config for windows.

[1] https://www.gnu.org/software/make/manual/

[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20014348

If I was going to try to improve on the state of the art, I'd clean up a few corner cases in make semantics where it misses productions in complicated corner cases (the problems are analogous to prolog vs datalog), and then fix the macro syntax.

If you want a good package manager for C/C++, check out Debian or its derivatives. (I'm serious -- if you're upset about the lack of packages, there's a pretty obvious solution. Now that docker exists, the packages run most places. Support for some sort of AppImage style installer would be nice for use with lesser distros.)
by lapcat | 2025-11-25 16:14:37+00:00
I wouldn't say that "very upset" is a correct or fair characterization for disputes in linguistics.

Chomsky's universal grammar work was based on too few languages, too little data, and doesn't hold up when you look at all human languages and usage.

See also Jenny Saffran's empirical work on infant statistical language learning.

The broad idea that some things are innate doesn't vindicate Chomsky's specific theories.
by dgolman | 2025-11-25 16:14:39+00:00
Episode 6 - The Mystery of Mania. Exposes the fraud in our mental health systems. 280 Billion out of 360 Billion per year is spent on F31.9 - Bipolar Unspecified alone. Yet, 7 million newly diagnosed, out rate the genetic evolution of the proven hereditary illness, itself.

Companies like HCA Healthcare (Worth: 8.06 Billion) own hospitals that receive payments from medicaid and double billing to private insurance.

It isnt about fraud, but fraud exist. It isnt about a diagnosis, a diagnosis exits. It is about codes that do not have help.
by grvdrm | 2025-11-25 16:14:44+00:00
>At around the age of 32 the strongest overall shift in trajectory is seen. Life events such as parenthood may play a role in some of the changes seen, although the research did not explicitly test this. “We know that women who give birth, their brain changes afterwards,” said Mousley. “It’s reasonable to assume that there could be a relationship between these milestones and what’s happening in the brain.”

>From 32 years, the brain architecture appears to stabilise compared with previous phases, corresponding with a “plateau in intelligence and personality” based on other studies. Brain regions also become more compartmentalised.

--

I felt this 32-year-old shift, but later (now 43). I joke with friends that I was a bone-head like most males until about 30. Joke yes, but feels right.

Prior to 30ish, I was more insecure. Lacking in emotional intelligence. My conclusions from my experience, not projections from what I've read about that time.

My career and relationship history reflect that switch-flip in a way. Only during the second half of my 30s did I begin to feel more secure and more confident in my career, despite not achieving some outrageous senior position or level of income. That career is now in a better and more measured place - in which I recognize what I do well and what I don't do well, and don't beat myself to a pulp for not having "it"

Only in my 30s did I robustly embrace the power of compromise in friendships and relationships. Now I'm near 10 years married (and happy, most of it, let's be real) with two wonderful kids.

And now I'm much capable of reasoning with my anxities, emotions, and insecurities. Do I still ruminate? Yes. Do I still react? Yes. But I know how to redraw situations to reset my in-moment feelings and/or avoid unecessary negative action.
by AndrewKemendo | 2025-11-25 16:14:53+00:00
I’m not narrow, you just wrote a lot of positive psychology babble.

This is an epistemological question and everything you wrote is epistemically bankrupt. To wit:

“Another, might intuit that the religious ceremony has been shown throughout their lives, to confer divine protection”

This kind of mythology is why humans and human society will never escape the cave, and semi-literate people sound smart to the illiterate with this bullshit
by xscott | 2025-11-25 16:15:05+00:00
I'm not sure which of the dozen Rust-syntax supporters I should reply to, but consider something like these three (probably equivalent) syntaxes:

let mut a = Vec::<u32>::new(); let mut b = <Vec::<u32>>::new(); let mut c = <Vec<u32>>::new(); let mut d: Vec<u32> = Vec::new();

Which one will your coworker choose? What will your other corworkers choose?

This is day one stuff for declaring a dynamic array. What you really want is something like:

let mut z = Vec<u32>::new();

However, the grammar is problematic here because of using less-than and greater-than as brackets in a type "context". You can explain that as either not learning from C++'s mistakes or trying to appeal to a C++ audience I guess.

Yes, I know there is a `vec!` macro. Will you require your coworkers to declare a similar macro when they start to implement their own generic types?

There are lots of other examples when you get to what traits are required to satisfy generics ("where clauses" vs "bounds"), or the lifetime signature stuff and so on...

You can argue that strong typing has some intrinsic complexity, but it's tougher to defend the multiple ways to do things, and that WAS one of Perl's mantras.
by unethical_ban | 2025-11-25 16:15:12+00:00
I don't understand why (ostensibly) regular users of HN denigrate the site with throwaways.

The only thing separating this site from other trash on the internet is good-faith discussion, low trolling and the notion that people here aren't posting low-effort content with impunity, in my opinion.

It's clear in this thread that one or more people are messing with the other user who thought they went overboard linking a user's profiles on other sites - a point that could have been made without the links included.
by dmoy | 2025-11-25 16:15:16+00:00
I gotta say, of all the corpo speak things, the whole verb/noun normalizing thing is maybe the least distasteful to me.

Not that I particularly like it, but compared to all the other stuff it at least seems tolerable. The penchant for deflecting questions and not answering directly, the weasel wording done to cover your ass, the use of words to mean something totally other than the word (e.g. "I take full responsibility" meaning "I will have no personal or professional repercussions"), etc. Some of it seems like it comes out of executive coaching, some of it definitely comes out of fear of lawsuits.
by SAI_Peregrinus | 2025-11-25 16:16:02+00:00
I think the main issue people who don't like the syntax have with it is that it's dense. We can imagine a much less dense syntax that preserves the same semantics, but IMO it'd be far worse.

Using matklad's first example from his article on how the issue is more the semantics[1]

pub fn read<P: AsRef<Path>>(path: P) -> io::Result<Vec<u8>> { fn inner(path: &Path) -> io::Result<Vec<u8>> { let mut file = File::open(path)?; let mut bytes = Vec::new(); file.read_to_end(&mut bytes)?; Ok(bytes) } inner(path.as_ref()) }

we can imagine a much less symbol-heavy syntax inspired by POSIX shell, FORTH, & ADA:

generic type P is Path containedBy AsRef public function read takes type Path named path returns u8 containedBy Vector containedBy Result fromModule io function inner takes type reference to Path named path returns u8 containedBy Vector containedBy Result fromModule io try let mutable file = path open fromModule File let mutable bytes = new fromModule Vector try mutable reference to bytes file.read_to_end bytes Ok return noitcnuf path as_ref inner return noitcnuf

and I think we'll all agree that's much less readable even though the only punctuation is `=` and `.`. So "symbol heavy" isn't a root cause of the confusion, it's trivial to make worse syntax with fewer symbols. And I like RPN syntax & FORTH.

[1] https://matklad.github.io/2023/01/26/rusts-ugly-syntax.html
by iteria | 2025-11-25 16:16:39+00:00
As a parent of a kid like this: start early with low stakes. You can increase your child's tolerance for pressure. I sometimes hear my kid saying sometimes after a deep breath, "There nothing to it, but to do it". And then work on focusing on what they did better versus how they did in absolute terms.

I see collapsing under pressure to be either a kind of anxiety or a fixation on perfect outcomes. Teaching a tolerance for some kinds of failure is the fix for both.
by dap | 2025-11-25 16:16:51+00:00
That’s not surprising to me, but it’s not much of an argument for changing the default to be less safe. Most people want poisoning to propagate fatal errors and avoid reading corrupted data, not to recover from panics.

Edit: isn’t that an argument not to change the default? If people were recovering from poison a lot and that was painful, that’s one thing. But if people aren’t doing that, why is this a problem?
by jungard | 2025-11-25 16:16:52+00:00
Why Anthropic Made Their Smartest Model 67% Cheaper (It’s Not Desperation) Anthropic released Claude Opus 4.5 yesterday. It scored higher than any human candidate ever on their notoriously difficult engineering take-home test. But that’s not the only headline.

The headline: they slashed pricing from $15/$75 to $5/$25 per million tokens. A 67% price drop on their flagship model. Opus now costs less than Sonnet did six months ago.

I’m running Opus 4.5 right now in a multi-tool session with web searches, file operations, and extended context.

What follows: news analysis, real-time observations, and strategic breakdown of what Anthropic is actually doing here.
by jasonthorsness | 2025-11-25 16:16:59+00:00
"In fact, the existing legal structure largely protects Valve’s ability to engage in this sort of digital market manipulation. Players and investors were simply out of luck."

Whew, as it should be. This is a game, and I'm happy that some cohort trying to make money off of it can't bully the creators into changing it.

IMO if you make something, and the terms are clear up-front when people pay for it, and they aren't forced to use it, you should retain full control over your work without some kind of legal regulation. This seems so obvious to me that I was surprised when Tim Sweeney prevailed against Apple and I'm not sure how I feel about that case (great respect to Tim Sweeney as an individual, but I am not sure I buy his arguments).
by Aurornis | 2025-11-25 16:17:39+00:00
> I think the whole message would be more palatable if it weren't written as a decree including the dig on "retro computers", but instead positioned only on the merits of the change.

The wording could have been better, but I don’t see it as a dig. When you look at the platforms that would be left behind they’re really, really old.

It’s unfortunate that it would be the end of the road for them, but holding up progress for everyone to retain support for some very old platforms would be the definition of the tail wagging the dog. Any project that starts holding up progress to retain support for some very old platforms would be making a mistake.

It might have been better to leave out any mention of the old platforms in the Rust announcement and wait for someone to mention it in another post. As it was written, it became an unfortunate focal point of the announcement despite having such a small impact that it shouldn’t be a factor holding up progress.
by grvdrm | 2025-11-25 16:17:41+00:00
Smart take. Parenting used to be more communal in some ways. Now it's up to two (maybe) working parents to deal with kids.

43-yr-old parent of 2. I love them. They're amazing. But there are so many challenging moments. So many.

In those deep/profound moments of stress, I try to remind myself that the only thing I really need to do is stay calm. Allowed to have emotions, course.

But to execute some level of calm really helps resolve so much of what you experience.
by razighter777 | 2025-11-25 16:17:45+00:00
Agreed. I think that announcement was unprofessional.

This was a unilateral decision affecting other's hard work, and the author didn't provide them the opportunity to provide feedback on the change.

It disregards the importance of ports. Even if an architecture isn't widely used, supporting multiple architectures can help reveal bugs in the original implementation that wouldn't otherwise be obvious.

This is breaking support for multiple ports to rewrite some feature for a tiny security benefit. And doing so on an unacceptably short timeline. Introducing breakage like this is unacceptable.

There's no clear cost-benefit analysis done for this change. Canonical or debian should work on porting the rust toolchain (ideally with tier 1 support) to every architecture they release for, and actually put the cart before the horse.

I love and use rust, it is my favorite language and I use it in several of my OSS projects but I'm tired of this "rewrite it in rust" evangilism and the reputational damage they do to the rust community.
by mardifoufs | 2025-11-25 16:18:48+00:00
It is unique in the sense that the charter itself has a clause that makes itself almost useless. And that provinces can also use it at will (that's really the main problem, as the federal government is way less likely to use it, and hasn't used it), and doing so short circuits any federal court oversight.

But I agree that parliamentary sovereignty is an even bigger can of worms.
by creata | 2025-11-25 16:18:59+00:00
That's just a weird and unrealistic example, though. Like, why is process_handler taking an owned, boxed reference to something it only needs shared access to? Why is there an unnecessary 'a bound on handler?

In the places where you need to add lifetime annotations, it's certainly useful to be able to see them in the types, rather than relegate them to the documentation like in C++; cf. all the places where C++'s STL has to mention iterator and reference invalidation.