MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by pndy | 2025-11-21 11:32:00+00:00
Might be somehow related-ish; in Poland by rmf24.pl outlet:

> On Friday, the Sejm (lower house) passed an amendment to the bill on the provision of electronic services, which allows for the blocking of illegal content on the internet. The new regulations anticipate that the president of UKE (Office of Electronic Communications) and KRRiT (National Broadcasting Council ) will be able to decide on the removal of content concerning 27 prohibited acts, mainly specified in the Penal Code. Prohibited acts include criminal threats, incitement to suicide, glorification of paedophilia, promotion of totalitarianism, incitement to hatred and content that infringes copyright.

> Under the bill, the author of the disputed content will receive a notification from the internet service provider about the initiation of the procedure and will have two days to present their position. The decision of the UKE and KRRiT to remove the content will not be subject to appeal, but the author will be able to lodge an objection with a common court.

> 237 MPs voted in favour of the bill, 200 were against, and five abstained. The bill will now be debated in the Senate.

This happens four days after Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Digital Affairs Krzysztof Gawkowski said that "Poland strongly opposes the introduction of mandatory scanning of private messages in instant messaging services.".

---

I don't want to wear a tinfoil hat but considering that chat control is unlikely to work at EU level, local "solutions" like above in Germany and Poland may give legal way to include scanning instant messengers in the future.
by nephihaha | 2025-11-21 11:32:24+00:00
I'm sure you don't but the debate is a lot more complex than the polarised version you present. People are not split up into two neat little camps on this matter despite attempts to do so. It is possible for someone to support one vaccine and oppose another due to issues arising from it. The other problem is that the term vaccine has been consciously redefined in recent years to encompass things it never used to. That's shifting the goal posts.
by eviks | 2025-11-21 11:33:11+00:00
> comply with FCC regulations and advertiser demands.

Or with a politician not liking a comedian? How would you rate the clarity of that rule?

But also, so does YouTube has standards to comply with laws, regulations, and advertiser demands, how does any of that adds clarity? The totality of those regulations is pretty fuzzy with plenty of changes in interpretation of the supposedly clear rules.

> Youtube is full of ads that would never be shown on cable TV.

Sure, one vague set of rules can still be more restrictive than another vague set of rules
by numpad0 | 2025-11-21 11:33:47+00:00
I was a bit outdated with resistor sizing and I don't have a great sources but apparently there are:

inch 0402, 0201, 01005, 009005, 008004, $1 mm 1005, 0603, 0402, 03015, 0201, 01005

these sizes... and $1 is the one in your mind that shall not be written in inches. The "01005 imperial" is just 0402, so it's not going up to the metric 01005 scale or beyond. I think.
by autoexec | 2025-11-21 11:34:22+00:00
It's not as if companies aren't shipping non-union jobs overseas or importing labor from overseas anyway. There's also a certain amount of irrational sentiment around silicon valley and the west coast generally. There's little doubt that companies could move shop to places in the US that aren't so insanely overpriced and without the high cost of living, especially with work from home being so popular, but for whatever reason (the weather, the "scene", the culture) companies are happy where they are and I don't expect that to change so quickly. It sure is nice having a lot of money and having a lot of nice options on where/how to spend it anyway, which might not always be the case in the overseas neighborhoods filled with unionless sweatshops.
by bko | 2025-11-21 11:34:47+00:00
I find it interesting how these kinds of measures are incredibly unpopular on HN and other online platforms. But if there was some regulation about social media algorithms, short form content, age restriction for social media and other mandated restrictions on social media companies, people are a lot more open.

Why is any restriction on adult content so fiercely defended? I can post that Mark Zuckerberg should be arrested and tried at the Hague and receive a somewhat warm reception on this platform. But there are these giant faceless corporations pushing unrestricted, often depraved content to minors and people stand up for them. And this content often includes anonymous uploaded content with underage girls. It's like the meme "leave those billionaires alone!"

I'm sure this will get downvoted, but help me understand what the visceral reaction is. I've heard people argue that this kind of adult content isn't harmful, but it seems obvious that it is, especially to children. At least more than short form content like TikTok. What would you rather your 12 year old spend hours watching? The adult industry has always been a few steps ahead of popular media in terms of virality, addiction and kitsch. They're shaping the online generation, and not in a good way.
by tlamponi | 2025-11-21 11:34:49+00:00
Your CAD experience level sounds like it is similar, but a bit higher than mine (2 years hand drawing, 2 years CAD, some more hobbyistic CAD & 3D modelling over the years for personal projects), so yeah SweetHome3D might not be that much help for you over using some CAD software directly.

I found furniture handling OK, but certainly has its rough edges. Good thing is that one can just import 3d models and so create the relevant pieces of furniture themselves; or use the generic boxes that SH3D has, if it's just for 2d space usage.

I did a few office space modellings with it, i.e. to get a feeling of how the space could be used best, and for that I found it quite OK. The result I got compared to the time invested was pretty good for my taste.
by panick21_ | 2025-11-21 11:35:25+00:00
The US space industry isn't that big. The same people are all over the place and many have been in the industry for many, many decades and had many positions. And many of the people interested in Mars are also interested in space in general and in military space in general, this isn't surprising.

When SpaceX got started, clearly with the focus on Mars he tried to pick up well known experts. Griffin among them, again this isn't surprising. And when SpaceX did that it was not at all clear that Griffin would be able to be NASA Administrator. And because Griffin as a very opinionated person he didn't get along super well with Musk and instead went to In-Q-Tel. But he knew that SpaceX was serious and Musk had the financed to put more money into SpaceX then most other companies.

Also you will see the Griffin was also at Orbital Sciences as CEO. So he had some links to both competitors in the COTS competition and likely knew or worked with many others over his career.

And if you do the research on COTS instead of just saying 'directed the first few $billion to a zero-experience SpaceX' is just a major oversimplification. COTS started by other people inside NASA who were sick of the old practices.

The first round of COTS were selected May 2006. SpaceX launched the first Falcon 1 in March 24, 2006. So during COTS SpaceX was not some 'nobody' company, NASA was aware of them and while today 'private company close to launching Orbital rocket' isn't impressive anymore, back then it was very much so. SpaceX had done more already then many other companies in the competition.

Also, if you know anything about NASA processes, the Administrator can not just 'pick' whoever he wants. There is process that is guided by lots of requirements and so on. Unless you have any actual evidence that this process was somehow corrupt and that Griffin conspired to give money to SpaceX above everybody, then you better show some evidence for that. And 'worked for few month with Musk' isn't evidence. And in fact SpaceX was selected because many of the NASA people who did the selection were impressed with SpaceX as many have talked about in interviews over the years.

Given that SpaceX was selected and was successful, its hard to argue that NASA made the wrong choice. NASA selected 3, SpaceX, Kistler and Orbital, and 2 of those were successful. So it seems the program wasn't run by idiots.

Literally the whole 'evidence' for 'theory' is Mike Griffin likes missile defense and he has been in the Space industry for many, many decades and knows everybody. That's it, that's your evidence. Griffin and others like him never made secret of what they wanted. That doesn't mean that when he worked at NASA missile defense was the only thing he ever thought about and that all his actions at NASA were only with the singular goal of missile defense.

If you want to make the argument that orbital missile defense is a bad idea, that's fine, you don't need need to make up a bunch of conspiracy theory where non exists. You just make yourself look silly.
by flohofwoe | 2025-11-21 11:35:49+00:00
> I want to run something that execs a command line tool, both in the browser. Doable yet?

If it's not possible from Javascript, it's also not possible from WASM, it's as easy as that.

If your command line tool can be compiled to WASM and works within the restrictions of the browser sandbox, it's trivial. But if you want to start a native command line tool from within the browser, it's pretty much impossible (and for good readons).

There's also a grey zone if you need it to work in a specific runtime environment. For instance VSCode extensions allow to run POSIX command line tools compiled to WASI, and those can safely access parts of the filesystem (like reading and writing files in the current project directory).
by cwillu | 2025-11-21 11:36:00+00:00
Most physical problems require some level of creativity: your door opening robot should be able to handle some level of dust on the handle, some level of slipperiness of the floor, some amount of packages blocking where it wants to stand, and crucially: some level of all of those things where it gives up rather than causing damage.

You can't open-loop everything, and the edge cases in a closed-loop absolutely explodes.

Yes, a “digital assistant“ responsible only for handling a door is manageable, but even “get a pot, fill it with water, and boil it” gets _remarkably_ complicated if you need reduce all the edge cases to known regions of behaviour that you can pre-program responses to.
by 0xDEAFBEAD | 2025-11-21 11:36:10+00:00
US median wages are higher than most of Europe, especially when adjusted for cost of living: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/median-income-after-tax-l...

Regarding BlackRock, I'm disappointed to see what appears to be populist misinformation on HN: https://www.investopedia.com/no-blackrock-isnt-buying-all-th...
by Nextgrid | 2025-11-21 11:36:37+00:00
Always funny to see the senile politicians blaming porn as the biggest threats to children and not their collapsing economies.

I'm sure when those kids grow up and work long hours for the rest of their lives (if they can find a job at all!) just to be able to afford rent they'll at least be grateful they weren't able to access porn in their teenage years.
by cons0le | 2025-11-21 11:36:58+00:00
Agreed 100%. "Enforcement" of the law has gotten so bleak that people can't imagine a world where we have to follow the laws as they are now.

Imagine a world where activity like this was fined, or where the police actually persecuted white collar criminals. A world where politicians and corporations were both afraid to engage in open corruption. Where companies got fined for uncompetitive practices and weren't able to pollute the environment or engage in union busting.

We wouldn't need any new laws to live in a world like that. We would just need the "enforcement" wing of the government to actually be effective and do thier jobs
by amarcheschi | 2025-11-21 11:37:02+00:00
Social media algorithm are being used to push agenda from other countries, see the Cambridge analytica case, or push extremist content to youngsters since it generates much more engagement.

Porn doesn't do this. It may have other issues, but it doesn't aim at maximing engagement with infinite scrolls and similar tactics. Let alone the content, who would watch porn for 12hrs/day? We already have the possibility to do that, and if somebody doesn't have mental issues, I'm of the opinion (s)he's not going to do that
by wellthisisgreat | 2025-11-21 11:37:19+00:00
Every person I consider smart / intellectually engaged, curious, regardless of the age, profession and affiliation with tech companies is actually deeply impressed by LLMs either by themselves or if they encounter what LLMs can do.

LLM bashers either feel threatened by them (most likely they come from creative professions and don’t want to learn new tools - it took years to learn how to draw and suddenly you have nano-banana - that may sting) or just latch on to the hater bandwagon because hey it’s sooo cooool to bash techies - take it nerds. Or engineers who can’t stand the fact that someone can actually leapfrog 5-6 years they spent adapting to new tools.

LLM is a VERY new tool, it’s not easy to master, it requires a change of mindset (it’s not “press a button get a LED light up” type of experience).

People are just lazy - that’s normal.

People who bring up ethics are actually masquerading their laziness with some holier than though posturing that’s inherently empty. The moment it starts benefit them or LLMs get easy enough for them to use they’ll switch their tune.

Name ONE instance where technological progress has been discarded in favor of “ethics”.

5 years later it will be unethical to NOT use LLMs like it’s unethical to submit handwritten documents so that ppl have to suffer through your handwriting - ethics adapt to people not the other way around, otherwise it’s some religious nut job territory.

Yawn, h8rs gonna h8, progress gonna progress.
by bko | 2025-11-21 11:38:08+00:00
Well considering you can go to prison in Germany for posting a meme on social media, that ship has already sailed. This has been a thing for a while. The only difference with this is this gives some parents control over what they allow their children to see on their computers

https://www.standingforfreedom.com/2025/04/11/german-court-p...
by thiht | 2025-11-21 11:38:55+00:00
It’s not if you pay the price. I have a Brother printer (inkjet) and it literally just works. I can go months without printing anything, then I just print a document from my phone or laptop and it just works.

This is something that should be normal but I’m still amazed every time I use it because I had an Epson before and the experience was… not the same.
by artpar | 2025-11-21 11:39:01+00:00
I wrote two

jslike (acorn based parser)

https://github.com/artpar/jslike

https://www.npmjs.com/package/jslike

wang-lang ( i couldn't get ASI to work like javascript in this nearley based grammar )

https://www.npmjs.com/package/wang-lang

https://artpar.github.io/wang/playground.html

https://github.com/artpar/wang
by hvb2 | 2025-11-21 11:40:08+00:00
And no one would be ok today with the risks taken in those launches.

Human spaceflight is more about mitigating risk than anything. Apollo was getting there first, so there was a willingness to take more risks.

Also, NASA at the time had a humongous budget compared to today, adjusted for inflation [1] and it was a lot more focused on just getting to the moon.

1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budget_of_NASA
by mrkeen | 2025-11-21 11:40:37+00:00
> The main point of OOP to me is hiding internal state.

> Some things are not well-suited to OOP, like linear processing of information in a server. I suspect this is where the FP excitement came from

'Hiding' isn't good enough.

OO sells the dream of 'black-box' objects, where you only need to be concerned with the inputs and outputs, and only the object cares about its internals.

But what do programmers stick inside objects? The world! Files are outside the black-box, but inside a FileWriter object. Likewise with external webservers and databases.

That's where the FP hype comes from - or at least Haskell. I can encapsulate functions perfectly (and actually stop caring about the internals!)

If I try to stuff an Airplane inside flight-recorder, I get a compile error.
by amiga386 | 2025-11-21 11:41:04+00:00
Are we reading the same document?

The image presented in the TV show is not that Dyatlov is evil, but that he is dismissive of his staff's concerns, he bullies them into submission, and he has a callous indifference to safety. This is all true. He's also the main author of the test procedure! Dyatlov had been at Chernobyl since planning began in 1973, and by comparison Toptunov was 25 years old and had only been in his post for 3 months. If anyone is to blame, it's going to be Dyatlov, and chief engineer Fomin who permitted Dyatlov to run the test. But as the TV show makes clear, this pales into insignificance when compared with a regime that intentionally buries secrets, like them already knowing the unsafe design of the RBMK control rods.

The only way I'd say the TV show did him a disservice is in showing him in complete denial there was a problem, and demanding water be pumped into the (nonexistant) core. In reality, he realised it was futile, but after reporting to Fomin and Bryukhanov and collapsing from radiation sickness, it was Fomin who took his place, did not understand the situation, and ordered the futile water pumping.

From INSAG-7:

> When the reactor power could not be restored to the intended level of 700 MW(th), the operating staff did not stop and think, but on the spot they modified the test conditions to match their view at that moment of the prevailing conditions.

> operating rules were violated, and control and safety rods were placed in a configuration that would have compromised the emergency protection of the reactor even had the rod design not been faulty on the ground of the positive scram effect mentioned earlier. Most reprehensibly, unapproved changes in the test procedure were deliberately made on the spot, although the plant was known to be in a condition very different from that intended for the test

> INSAG, with the present report, does not retract INSAG-1, nor does it alter the conclusions of that report except as clearly indicated here. While the balance of INSAG's judgement of the factors contributing to the accident has shifted, the many other conclusions of INSAG-1 are unaffected.

If it's "business as usual" for the operators to invent changes to nuclear safety tests as they carry them out... I don't know what to say to you!
by johnisgood | 2025-11-21 11:41:05+00:00
Why would what you said curb my enthusiasm for bees though?

Can you provide me more specifics on this by the way?

> This has some adversarial effect on other pollinators, which hurts ecosystems more than it helps.

What are those adversarial effects, what other pollinators, and how does it hurt the ecosystem more than it helps?

I do not mind bees having kept in higher numbers, and beekeepers can do it anywhere without affecting the ecosystem, I believe.
by fabian2k | 2025-11-21 11:41:15+00:00
Social media regulation isn't particularly popular here on HN, though it is certainly in other areas. You also won't find many people defending CSAM here as you imply.

You also have to assume that people are not taking the purpose of these new measures at face value, but assume that there are other underlying motives and that the measures are broader than just simple pornography. And I don't think that assumption is unjustified.

The ID-based measures like in the UK are a gigantic privacy nightmare as well.

These measures are also not specific to kids, in the end they essentially always affect the access to this kind of content by adults as well. And some people think that is none of the government's business.

An additional factor is that these measures are technically infeasibly without drastic measures. So they're either easy to circumvent, or would give the government enormous power and access over all kinds of communication.
by epolanski | 2025-11-21 11:41:58+00:00
I'm not the previous user, but I imagine that weeks of investment might be a commitment one does not have.

I have implemented an interpreter for a very basic stack-based language (you can imagine it being one of the simplest interpreters you can have) and it took me a lot of time and effort to have something solid and functional.

Thus I can absolutely relate to the idea of having an LLM who's seen many interpreters lay out the ground for you and make you play as quickly as possible with your ideas while procrastinating delving in details till necessary.
by nephihaha | 2025-11-21 11:42:56+00:00
Politics is rarely fact, it is subjective. Right now we are being presented a binary in which we have the choice of being shafted by either government or big business in a top down model. (The reality is a blend of the two as in Davos.) There is little real discussion of individual autonomy in such a discussion or collective bargaining at a grassroots level. Socialism usually ends up being top down control not community empowerment.
by GuB-42 | 2025-11-21 11:45:08+00:00
I get the idea but it is a very one-sided argument. It sounds like "but can't they just trust us?". And no, they can't, that's the reason why regulation exists. They said they have done all sorts of research to make sure their tech is safe, but would they have done it if there wasn't any regulation? Many companies wouldn't have, because it is not profitable, even accounting for the risk and especially for startups that don't have a lot to lose.

They also claim that by not letting they do their things, regulation caused the emission of plenty of CO2, NO, etc... Yeah, right, we can say the same for drug testing too, drug testing may have killed millions by delaying the adoption of life saving drugs, so should we stop testing drugs? It is debatable really, but I am sure that experts studied to question seriously and that the answer is no.

Regulation is costly and inefficient, obviously, that's the point, if it wasn't you wouldn't need regulation because that's what companies would do naturally. It is also not perfect and you can always find bad regulation. But overall, they are important.
by quitit | 2025-11-21 11:45:31+00:00
They would seem to contain identifiers as law enforcement have been able to follow up on instances where there has been airdropping of perverse images, but as noted by others the files don't include names.

The problem with airdrop (and likely why the 10 minute setting now exists) is that it includes a preview image as part of the notification request.

So other than being able to subject someone to perverse images, preview images have also been used in state-sponsored zero-click attacks to infect the phones of their targets. While that vector seems to be muted for now, the 10 minute setting provides a layer of defence against both potential future zero-clicks and receiving unsolicited previews images.
by frumiousirc | 2025-11-21 11:45:34+00:00
> more examples in that thread

Some supposition: A Fourier amplitude image should show that pattern as peaks at a certain angle/radius location. The exact location may be part of the identification scheme. Running peak finding on the Fourier image and then zeroing out the frequencies in the peak should remove the pattern. Modeling the shape of the peak would allow mimicking the application of a legit SynthID signature.

If anyone tries/tried this already, I'd love to see the results.
by matheusmoreira | 2025-11-21 11:46:38+00:00
> Probably the most distinctive feature of MDL is its mechanism for user-defined types, which is the best of any language with which we are familiar.

> User-defined types have been retrofitted on some of the newer versions of Lisp, but in most cases they can be used only with special functions and cannot be used in the same general way that Lists can.

Can you elaborate on this? The examples from the PFF suggest it's just the usual lispy type declarations.