MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by speak_plainly | 2025-11-11 20:30:57+00:00
An ideal listen for anyone looking to sharpen their critical thinking. The reasoning moves are subtle, and it’s easy to miss the small leaps and omissions that reveal how persuasive but unsound arguments work.

If you want to test your logic radar, keep a Reasoning-Error Bingo Card handy — here are some of the most common moves to watch for:

- Anecdotal Evidence as Proof – moving personal testimonies presented as sufficient evidence.

- Cherry-picking – highlighting the few “hits” or successful moments and ignoring null or failed sessions.

- Facilitator/Ideomotor Bias – unacknowledged influence of helpers who already know the answers.

- Lack of Experimental Control – demonstrations without blinding or verification procedures.

- Equivocation on “Spelling” and “Communication” – shifting definitions of what counts as independent expression.

- Over-extension/Universal Claim – extrapolating from a handful of cases to “all nonspeakers.”

- Appeal to Emotion and Narrative Framing – using distressing or inspiring stories to disarm skepticism.

- Appeal to Authority – invoking credentials, research funding, or famous supporters in place of data.

- Confirmation Bias/Omission of Counter-Evidence – excluding decades of research debunking similar methods.

- Shifting the Burden of Proof – implying critics must disprove telepathy rather than producers proving it.

- Quantum-Language Hijack – invoking “quantum entanglement” or “energy fields” as pseudo-explanations.

- False Dichotomy (“open-minded vs. materialist”) – framing skepticism as moral or emotional failure.

- Paradigm-Appeal Fallacy – claiming we’re witnessing a scientific “revolution” instead of providing data.

- Ambiguous Success Criteria – redefining what counts as a correct answer or “connection.”

- Halo Effect through Compassion – moral halo from helping disabled children transferred to truth of the claim.

Ironically, in trying to transcend “materialism,” the series repeats Descartes’ old mistake — treating mind and matter as mutually exclusive instead of as aspects of a single natural order. That move saddles them with the same impossible burden Descartes faced: explaining how an immaterial mind could causally interact with the physical world on top of everything else they need to prove.
by johnnyanmac | 2025-11-11 20:31:23+00:00
>but where is this reductionism-to-rationalize-trend coming from lately?

It's always been in the community. I think this decade really showed that these weren't just stellmans to understand perspectives, but die hard conservatives (in the literal sense of the word) who want to maintain decorum over anything else. No matter the situation. Google can announce a hostile takeover of a government tomorrow and such folk will react "well let them talk it out. Google is a big company after all".
by SuperNinKenDo | 2025-11-11 20:31:55+00:00
For what it's worth, I'm interested. So far I've just bought a couple books on Middle Egyptian and read a basic intro that my library had, but between all the languages I'm already learning, couldn't really justify putting in the time.

A study group or study partner would probably be enough extra motivation to get basic proficiency at the least. So if you're willing let me know if you find/wish to create something.
by mustache_kimono | 2025-11-11 20:32:38+00:00
> This subthread is about claims of STATIC checking of memory safety. A panic is not static checking. Perhaps you should read what you respond to.

Oh, I read it.

Rust, and for that matter, the person to whom you are replying, above, never claimed that Rust could statically check array bounds. You created that straw-man. Yes, Rust does use static analysis, as one important method to achieve memory safety, but Rust doesn't require static analysis in every instance for it to be Rust's big step function, or for Rust to achieve memory safety.

Yes, certain elements of memory safety can only be achieved at runtime. Fine? But using static analysis to achieve certain elements of memory safety at compile time is obviously better where possible, rather than only at runtime, such as re: Java or Fil-C?
by godelski | 2025-11-11 20:32:40+00:00
I'm fairly confident I could sue that store owner for stalking if they were logging every time I entered that store and left, along with all my activities.

I'm absolutely positive I could if they were getting other store owners to help them track me.

What I don't understand is why this is unacceptable if they do it to a single person but perfectly normal if they do it to all their customers. IMO that should make things worse, not better.

Let's put it this way. You'd get a restraining order against someone if they followed you around all day, logging when you woke up, ate, who you talked with (even if they don't hear the conversation), where you went, and when you went to bed. That's clearly stalking, right? So why us it suddenly acceptable when it's being done by some guy named Mark who is stalking a billion people instead of just one?

We clearly differentiate this from being a regular customer at a store. If I'm a regular at Joe's Corner Market and get a sandwich every Wednesday for lunch then he remembers me because we're talking face to face and making conversation. It's personal. There's clear consent in what I'm sharing and there's a clear expectation that Joe isn't going to use that information to manipulate me or follow me around town. Our interaction is limited to the store and maybe bumping into each other on the street. It's clearly not stalking, we're just friendly. The same way your partner might know about when you wake up, go to sleep, eat for breakfast, and all that same stuff. Your partner isn't stalking you.

[Edit]: I want to encourage the above comments. Doesn't matter if recursive4 believes the other side or not, I want these conversations to be front and center. I like to see the other responses than mine as well and I think these help us refine our arguments and by being prominent they help others be convinced and join us. So while I know we don't usually talk about how to upvote/downvote, I'll just say "vote strategically rather than agreeability" :)
by ontouchstart | 2025-11-11 20:32:44+00:00
Thanks for the link to Higgs story.

I was trained as a Physicist but went to software engineering. These days I would describe my job as a digital plumber. There are two kinds of holes we are dealing with: rabbit holes and potholes. We tend to get into the rabbit holes because of the love of tools and fall into potholes because of not paying attention.

It turned out the industry might do the same. But the cost would be billions of dollars and decades of work of young talented people.
by bigbadfeline | 2025-11-11 20:33:38+00:00
> Both of these become a big gamble if we do not work within the existing system.

I guess, by "changing the system", achierius did mean going Marxist or another silliness of that sort, but generally speaking, the system can be changed by working within the system too.

Observe how we are now moving towards a system that isn't based on the Constitution but on some weird mixture of libertarian dogma, excuses for oppression and a cult of personality. It could easily go into a full fledged dictatorship entirely from within, and why not, the top players don't hide their love for it.

> I am saying this as a person who had a front seat to a something similar as a kid. It was relatively peaceful and it still managed to upend lives of millions

Weather you noticed or not, the system was changed from above, by people "within the system"... So you're OK to let that happen again but in a worse direction?

> in real life, power re-alignment of that magnitude tends to be.. chaotic.

Interestingly enough, you may want to reexamine your experience as a child to make sure there was some sort of "power re-alignment". Looking at the facts, I don't see it but I do see how chaos can be useful to those within the system.
by otherme123 | 2025-11-11 20:33:46+00:00
>Ffmpeg has no obligation to fix any of this

I read this as nobody wants CVEs open on their product, so you might feel forced to fix them. I find it more understandable if we talk about web frameworks: Wordpress don't want security CVEs open for months or years, or users would be upset they introduce new features while neglecting safety.

I am a nobody, and whenever I found a bug I work extra to attach a fix in the same issue. Google should do the same.
by ChrisMarshallNY | 2025-11-11 20:33:50+00:00
Looks like this was a security issue.

I don't consider a security issue to be a "standard bug." I need to look at it, and [maybe] fix it, regardless of who reported it.

But in my projects, I have gotten requests (sometimes, demands) that I change things like the published API (a general-purpose API), to optimize some niche functionality for one user.

I'll usually politely decline these, and respond with an explanation as to why, along with suggestions for them to add it, after the fact.
by tweetle_beetle | 2025-11-11 20:34:18+00:00
You can construct a philosophical argument that value is all relative without having to casually drop anecdata demonstrating that you personally spend many hundreds of times more on an everyday object than is typical without consideration.

Simmel managed it ok. [1]

[1] https://brocku.ca/MeadProject/Simmel/Simmel_1900.html
by goelbab | 2025-11-11 20:35:07+00:00
Many of these microplastic studies [1-9] rely on small sample sizes (e.g., n=10 for brain tissue) and detection methods that could pick up contamination from lab equipment itself. It reminds me of when everyone was afraid of BPA

And what defines a “microplastic”? There’s so many different types of plastics that all have different effects on the body

What’s really the health trade-off compared to having to monitor every tiny little thing
by pclmulqdq | 2025-11-11 20:35:27+00:00
Please go ahead and find me a transmission chain of any of these nearly eradicated infectious diseases that went through someone involved in MAHA or Children's Health Defense. If you go looking, you will find that every single outbreak of Measles, Polio, or any similar disease in North America goes through a fundamentalist religious community. The Wakefield/RFK groups are really not large or tightly-connected enough to do this.

What you can blame RFK for (and what you should blame him for) is cutting funding to identify these possible transmission events and intercept them. This is an area where the Trump admin made severe cuts, on the back of RFK's ideological bent against the concept of infectious disease and the "government efficiency" wave. As a result, responses to outbreaks in these religious communities are much, much slower. It is not a "MAHA wave" that is causing outbreaks like this, it's the loss of funding.
by sbszllr | 2025-11-11 20:35:47+00:00
As someone who has a mirrorless scanning setup for my film, and pondered getting a dedicated scanner... the price of this is quite steep given how inflexible of a tool it is.

A second hand DSLR setup is going to be roughly the same price or less. I'm also not sure what kind of workflow improvements it actually offers. If you want fancy and experimental, filmomat has arguably a more interesting but pricier offering.

But naysaying aside, I hope they manage to find a niche that allows them to survive as a company, and keep the analog photography revival alive.
by jameslk | 2025-11-11 20:35:49+00:00
Also relevant:

> “This should not be seen, in our view, as a cautious or negative stance on Nvidia, but rather in the context of SoftBank needing at least $30.5bn of capital for investments in the Oct-Dec quarter, including $22.5bn for OpenAI and $6.5bn for Ampere

> That amounts to “more in a single quarter than it has invested in aggregate over the two prior years combined,” Bulk said.

> … Following the recapitalization and SoftBank’s $22.5 billion investment into the ChatGPT maker, the Japanese firm’s 4% ownership of OpenAI will increase to 11%.

It sounds like Nvidia was played out for them and they’re aggressively trying to get in on OpenAI so they can exit sometime after retail investors get in
by gorgoiler | 2025-11-11 20:35:58+00:00
For me, strictly immutable and side-effect free programming was a forcing function* to make me really decompose problems into isolated parts. Only when I could do that could I truly say I understood the problem (and its distinct sub-problems) in full.

In that sense, Erlang isn’t really different from any other functional programming except that it also ships with a lot of actor / message passing concurrency dogma which solves a different and equally delightful set of problems (low-bug concurrency) at the same time.

So it’s a double hit of two great ideas in one paradigm.

*Oops, no pun intended.
by getpost | 2025-11-11 20:36:09+00:00
> Like dosing on ketamine then getting up on stage and making Nazi salutes.

It's much more likely to be the Adderall.

"One reason that narcissists so commonly abuse drugs and alcohol is because the substances amplify their feelings of grandiosity and invulnerability. More so, narcissists often get stuck in the cycle of drug abuse because drugs readily cause the brain to deny there is a problem." https://illinoisrecoverycenter.com/narcissism-and-addiction/

Impulsivity mediates the association between narcissism and substance-related problems beyond the degree of substance use: a longitudinal observational study "A grandiose self-enhancement strategy should be reflected in motives of self-enhancement, such as increasing confidence through substance use." https://bmcpsychiatry.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12...

Personality Disorders, Narcotics, and Stimulants; Relationship in Iranian Male Substance Dependents Population "correlation between stimulant use and histrionic personality disorder (P < 0.001) and antisocial and narcissistic personality disorders (P < 0.05)" https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4553170/
by vlovich123 | 2025-11-11 20:36:29+00:00
Again, no one is arguing that bounds checking isn’t required for memory safety. You are intentionally continuing to argue against a position no one has taken anywhere that Rust somehow always has 0 runtime safety checking and everything happens statically at compile time. Literally RefCell and array bounds. I keep trying to clarify the wording that’s in the article and what it’s intended to mean that you have issue with and instead you keep insisting it means the wrong thing literally no one has argued for.
by Keyframe | 2025-11-11 20:36:48+00:00
I'd never run film at claimed top speeds unless it was a disposable copy print, but seems exciting. Long way have we come from linear array cameras and telecine to these. Different light sources would be useful for dust and scratches mask. $1k price is also insane. For full mechanical assembly with casters etc it probably comes within five or ten, but still a bargain. I wrote here years ago where I had a side hustle scanning and processing ye olde reels with an absolute beast of a scanner (think room sized) that did 2k in real time with an SGI and Hippi fiber network. Tech almost interesting as films themselves. :)
Ask HN: Do businesses want to leave the cloud and return to installable apps?
by cyrusradfar | 2025-11-11 20:36:58+00:00
TLDR; is there an opportunity to compete with B2B SaaS software providers who serve small mid-market by providing a one-time licensed, "local", version of software vs a subscription SaaS offering?

When I started my computing life, software lived in boxes you bought and brought home. IT was on one to 30 disks that you'd use to run it and, every once in a while, it would ask you to pull find disk 14 and put it in to run some process.

Now, we have had about almost two decades where many products live on servers outside your system.

As I'm working on something now (I won't self promote), and it's inspiring me to try something completely different in the product and system design, to try to accomplish much more on the local file system.

I don't know if anyone's coined a term, but I've been calling it "Local-first" or "Cloudless" development. The idea is that most features can be implemented with flat files, and potentially a local sqlite, duckdb, etc.

I'm of the belief that the economy isn't in a great place and folks will look to cut. A great way to do so is to stop paying insane SaaS fees and start to use more local installed software with a one-time license purchase and you pay to upgrade as needed for features. This is the blend of the old world and new.

Software versions can be downloaded and updated from the cloud, for a fee, otherwise, you just use what you have relatively with some support guarantee, e.g. 3 years for any version, then there's no more bug fixes/support.

I'm curious if you all feel there's an opportunity to re-build a lot of the SaaS world in this model and Agents are going to make it possible by allowing normal people to handle more complex local setups for software.

I think there's opportunities for:

- Accounting software - POS - Scheduling - CRM & client - Electronic Medical Records (ERM)

I want to be clear, I'm not a "purist" claiming nothing can be hosted, e.g. some dynamic lists/maps are best managed server-side and the app can reload them, just that the business doesn't charge extra for having access to the cloud.

Thoughts?
by sunscream89 | 2025-11-11 20:37:31+00:00
I share my normal as of you congenial side to acrue karma, so that I may burn it saying truthful things the mind coddled intelligentsia do not want to hear.

For me, these are the hare.

I will message something from your profile. Thanks for taking an interest in the greatest estrangement of our humanity.

I have had a hand full of former HN accounts. Some search condition (“thought control”) may reveal them all.
by themafia | 2025-11-11 20:37:40+00:00
> How do you think Jeff got a 500 million dollars yacht? Not by writing checks.

A rising tide lifts all yachts. If he had written the check, my instinct tells me, he would have enough for two yachts. Goodwill is an actual line item on 10Q's and 10K's. I don't know why companies think it's worth ignoring.
by kingkongjaffa | 2025-11-11 20:38:30+00:00
Hope. For better or worse tech nerds (me included) maintain a hopeful optimism that Apple will make good products.

For the longest time they were the only tech company that really cared about design, and most people don't encounter good or thoughtful design or ever really see behind the scenes or think about design and designers.

Jony Ive and Steve Jobs really glorified design I think rightly in many ways, and elevated what industrial design could be in technology and engineering companies that historically had treated design as something you paid an external agency to do.

Most people don't know Dieter Rams or Donald Norman, tech people maybe know Edward Tufte. Loads of people know Jony Ive.

Unfortunately the only good ideas Apple have had this decade are the M-series processors, which are fantastic. Their software and hardware are otherwise lacking, across all categories.

So, when Apple releases _anything_ people hope it's (a return to) good, of all the consumer product makers I think Apple has the highest level of goodwill, people are excited and hopeful that the next thing they release will be great, and are disappointed when it isn't.
by throwaway89201 | 2025-11-11 20:38:32+00:00
No, I merely called you out on the enormous discrepancy between your first (false, unproven) statement and your second statement, and did some work clarifying the details where you only made lazy statements.

You could have said that there's limited evidence from a single mouse study that suggests that NAC might promote tumor growth in humans as well. That's fair. But you didn't. You (falsely) stated that "NAC causes cancer in humans".
by Loquebantur | 2025-11-11 20:38:33+00:00
Being lazy incurs costs. With regard to "conspiracies" that cost is explicitly vulnerability to them.

Neither "chemtrails", "UFOs&aliens" nor "telepathy" appear particularly "plausible". But that could just as well be a statement about your method of determining 'plausibility'?

You invoke limited personal resources to justify complacency. Likely, you estimate the costs of being wrong as negligible since you never really thought about possible implications and do not know about any being particularly relevant to you. That's an argument from ignorance.
by iscoelho | 2025-11-11 20:39:10+00:00
Google is, at no cost to FFMPEG:

1) dedicating compute resources to continuously fuzzing the entire project

2) dedicating engineering resources to validating the results and creating accurate and well-informed bug reports (in this case, a seriously underestimated security issue)

3) additionally for codecs that Google likely does not even internally use or compile, purely for the greater good of FFMPEG's user base

Needless to say, while I agree Google has a penny to spare to fund FFMPEG, and should (although they already contribute), I do not agree with funding this maintainer.
by themafia | 2025-11-11 20:40:01+00:00
> Google found a bug

That does not impact their business or their operations in any way whatsoever.

> If it's a valid bug then it's a valid bug end of story.

This isn't a binary. It's why CVEs have a whole sordid scoring system to go along with them.

> Software owes it to its users to be secure

ffmpeg owes me nothing. I haven't paid them a dime.
by eahm | 2025-11-11 20:40:27+00:00
I used to have the W-520U and it was the best watch I've ever owned ...also the only watch/thing I ever lost in my life, I left it at the gym class in school and the next day boom, gone.

http://www.digital-watch.com/DWL/1work/casio-w-520u

My favorite series since 10-20+ years ago is the ProTrek, which I guess it's part of G-Shock but I don't see them in the site. (I guess the PRT-1GPJ is there at 1999).

https://www.casio.com/us/watches/protrek

https://www.casio.com/europe/watches/protrek/brand/collectio...

https://www.casio.com/intl/watches/protrek/30th/history
by araes | 2025-11-11 20:40:33+00:00
Not sure if this meets your criteria, yet iNaturalist [1] is kind of "gamified". Has a rather large "bird" taxon observation amount. 38,393,861 observations, 11,165 species, 1,130,700 observers, 188,988 identifiers (people who identify species from your pictures)

When Romania announced that the Lesser Kestrel had returned after 100 years iNaturalist actually had several of the observations in the nearby area. [2]

[1] https://www.inaturalist.org/observations?subview=map&taxon_i...

[2] https://www.inaturalist.org/observations?subview=map&taxon_i...
by Seattle3503 | 2025-11-11 20:40:36+00:00
> “The position of the FFmpeg X account is that somehow disclosing vulnerabilities is a bad thing. Google provides more assistance to open source software projects than almost any other organization, and these debates are more likely to drive away potential sponsors than to attract them.”

This position likely to drive away maintainers. Generally the maintainers need these projects less than the big companies that use them. I'm not sure what Google's endgame is
by yndoendo | 2025-11-11 20:41:47+00:00
I program on Windows for work daily.

You have to pay me to use Windows and Microsoft products.

There are so many alternatives that have higher standards. I keep having regressive issues with Visual Studio. The OS quality has been continually degrading. Microsoft is even pushing to have a @microsoft.com account on their Windows embedded IoT variants. There should be no reason an embedded OS requires an online account nor that XBox and other useless features baked in.

I wont event touch how bad the User Experience has become in their Office products and how much of their products have inconsistent key combinations. Ctrl+F ...