MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by teitoklien | 2025-11-06 02:04:56+00:00
Experience working with doctors a few times, and then we’ll see all the bias if one is still surviving lol. Doctors are some of the most corrupt professions who are more focused on selling drugs they get paid commission for to promote, or they obsess over tons and tons of expensive medical tests, that they themselves often know is not needed, except they ask for it, simply out of fear of courts suing them for negligence in future or because again , THEY GET A COMMISSION from the testing agencies for sending them clients.

And even with all of that info, they often come out with the wrong conclusions at times. Doctors do a critically important role in our society and during covid they risked their lives for us, more than anyone else, i do not want to insult or bring down the amount of hard work doctors do for their society.

But worshipping them as holier than thou gods is bullshit, that almost anyone who has spent some time with going back and forth with various doctors over the course of years will come to the conclusion of.

Having an AI assistant doesnt hurt, in terms of medical hints, we need to make having Personal Responsibility popular again, in society’s obsession for making every thing “idiot proof” or “baby proof” we keep losing all sorts of useful and interesting solutions because our politicians have a strong itch to regulate anything and everything they can get their hands on, to leave a mark on society.
by atleastoptimal | 2025-11-06 02:05:12+00:00
we don’t have AGI yet but we do have three things

1. AI that has huge demand and massive utility right now

2. Predictable improvements on the horizon for models in proven domains

3. Many heuristic that make near term AGI a reasonable bet to make, assuming progress continues as it has over the past few years

All these taken together makes what’s going on right now very clear and not surprising.
by billfor | 2025-11-06 02:05:13+00:00
I went to my Costco right before they banned phosphates in the dishwashing detergent and got a pallet of Cascade with 5% phosphates. People looked at me like I was was crazy. I'm still going through my pallet 15 years later and my dishes are always clean :-) I just throw a bit of the detergent in the tub for prewash rather than put it in the cup, as it will leak out anyway. One thing you could probably do for the phosphate-free stuff is to add a "teaspoon of TSP" to the detergent and that would probably help - not sure if the formulation in today's detergent would agree with it though. I'll find out in another 5 years I guess....
by eru | 2025-11-06 02:05:59+00:00
> For this use case, we've found it best to just use a fuzzer, and work off the tracebacks.

Yes, if that was the only property you want to test, a dedicated fuzzer is probably better.

But if you are writing a bunch of property based tests, you can add a basic "this doesn't crash in unexpected ways" property nearly for free.
by eru | 2025-11-06 02:07:12+00:00
> Great! Now I have a stupid bug that always returns 0, so these all pass, and since I didn't think about this case (otherwise I'd not have written that stupid bug in the first place), I didn't add a property about a + b only being 0 if a == -b and boom, test is happy, and there is nothing that the framework can do about it.

Well, just add one example based test for eg 1 + 2 = 3, and you would catch this bug.

You can freely mix and match property based tests with example based tests.

> Coming up with those properties is hard for real life code and my main gripe with formal methods based approaches too, like model checking or deductice proofs.

Yes, property based testing is an acquired skill that has to be learned.

It's not so bad, once you've done it a few times, though.

It also changes how you design code in the first place. Just like even example-based testing changes how you design your code.

> They move the bugs from the (complicated) code to the list of properties, which ends up just as complicated and error prone, and is entirely un...tested.

You might be doing this wrong, if your list of properties is as complicated as the code. And it's not 'untested': you are exercising your properties against your code.

For a conceptually really simple example: suppose you have two different ways to solve a certain problem, and suppose neither is really simpler than the other. You still gain something from comparing the output of both approaches on random input: unless you made the mistake in both approaches, many bugs will show up as discrepancies that you can investigate. Hypothesis even includes 'shrinking' to helpfully provide you with a minimal counterexample that shows the divergence.

From a formal point of view, you can say that this property is 'untested'; but in practice you still gain something by comparing the two implementations.
by ivraatiems | 2025-11-06 02:07:33+00:00
I'm not sure of the motivations (the author is definitely trying to market themselves), but I think the insights here are really spot on. Having recently left an employer who was undergoing many of these experiences, it felt almost too accurate. That said, there's one main thing that I think is missed here:

It's not just about executives being surprised by what engineers are thinking. It's also engineers not understanding the purpose and goals of the business.

Consider a typical startup environment. Lots of highly competent, experienced engineers working at startups will willingly, even excitedly make choices which are expensive, unscalabe, unmaintainable, etc., in the name of getting things out the door fast. They do that not because they enjoy creating problems but because they, and the startup's leadership, are aligned. The goal of the startup is to push a good proof-of-concept, get customers and investors, and gain traction to become a going concern.

Likewise, in an environment that is well-established and used to delivering a certain quality on a certain timeline, those same engineers will do more expensive, scalable work for less reward, and be rewarded. This feels uncommon because we don't hear about it a lot, but there are tens of thousands of small, capable, going-concern companies that do exactly this. They go on year after year, making a profit and delivering a decent to great product, without a lot of fanfare. They don't run away to billion-dollar valuations, and they don't crash out. It's just fine.

But in still other organizations, it's rarely made clear that the org doesn't value the things engineers assume, by default, ought to be valued. For example, an organization might say they want reliability, scalability, good design, etc., then repeatedly make decisions indicating that isn't what they value. They do not communicate their goals to the engineers. They do not say their actual intentions. They claim to want A, actually want B, ignore and deprioritize work that'd help produce B, and then are surprised when people are distrustful and resign.

I have no problem with doing a job a certain way if that's what I signed up for and you ask me to do it upfront. But if I signed up for A and you gave me B without warning, I might just leave. And I wouldn't bother to tell you why on the way out.

(Also, I think that there's a slight error in the author's timelines: Junior engineers would notice after senior engineers that senior engineers are checked out, since it's the senior engineers doing the checking out. But they'd probably notice before management does.)
by peteforde | 2025-11-06 02:09:27+00:00
I appreciate the analogy but respectfully I don't think it holds up 1:1.

Love or hate window shopping, the nature of shopping for fashion lends itself far more to in-person evaluation. Every item is slightly different, and so is every person wearing them. This is why you can try on clothes in the store!

Crate digging for vinyl is similar. There's a real joy of discovery, and turntables with headphones for auditioning purchases.

I have a hard time picturing the same dynamic with identical shrink-wrapped boxes.
by emmyandrey | 2025-11-06 02:09:30+00:00
Location: Sweden, EU

Remote: Yes (can work within UTC ±5)

Willing to relocate: Yes!!

Technologies: Docker, Kubernetes/K3s, Terraform, Ansible, Prometheus, Grafana, Linux, AWS, Azure, CI/CD

Résumé/CV: Available on request

Email: mashenko.andr@gmail.com

Website: andreymsh.site

Hi, I’m Andrey, junior DevSecOps engineer based in Sweden.

I’m a hard-working and motivated person who enjoys challenges and learning new technologies. I’m looking for opportunities to grow, contribute, and gain hands-on experience in real-world projects.

Open to short-term, part-time, or junior roles in DevOps, Cloud, or Infrastructure Engineering.
by bigyabai | 2025-11-06 02:09:34+00:00
Devil's advocate; if the fed decides to give it to them, how is it any different from ordinary financier economics?

I don't think this is a remotely smart decision, for the record. But the market has long been enabled to make stupid decisions, even by the command of the US government. We really screwed this pooch when the US ended the gold standard and decided that we would play with funny-money until the players could shake down the bank. Investing in a ludicrously-unsustainable global surveillance network like OpenAI is the next logical step after refusing to prosecute Google and Apple for abusing their control. The next "great work" is convincing the masses that AI is an ordinary part of their lives like the smartphone, and in many cases it's already working.

From a completely cynical perspective of OpenAI and the federal government colluding, it makes perfect sense.
by halosghost | 2025-11-06 02:09:53+00:00
Hey @dang (I know it doesn't work, but isn't it fun to use your imagination?), can we get this press release replaced by a link to the actual paper [0]? This one is even open-access!

All the best,

-HG

[0] https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-025-64982-y
by bencornia | 2025-11-06 02:10:34+00:00
I just started reading Your Erroneous Zones by Wayne Dyer, and the author has this to say about intelligence and happiness:

> Taking charge of yourself involves putting to rest some very prevalent myths. At the top of the list is the notion that intelligence is measured by your ability to solve complex problems; to read, write and compute at certain levels; and to resolve abstract equations quickly. This vision of intelligence predicates formal education and bookish excellence as the true measures of self-fulfillment. It encourages a kind of intellectual snobbery that has brought with it some demoralizing results. We have come to believe that someone who has more educational merit badges, who is a whiz at some form of scholastic discipline (math, science, a huge vocabulary, a memory for superfluous facts, a fast reader) is “intelligent.” Yet mental hospitals are clogged with patients who have all of the properly lettered credentials—as well as many who don’t. A truer barometer of intelligence is an effective, happy life lived each day and each present moment of every day. If you are happy, if you live each moment for everything it’s worth, then you are an intelligent person. Problem solving is a useful adjunct to your happiness, but if you know that given your inability to resolve a particular concern you can still choose happiness for yourself, or at a minimum refuse to choose unhappiness, then you are intelligent.
by darthnebula | 2025-11-06 02:10:51+00:00
I really hope Framework ignores these people. They are not Linux Ambassadors, they are political activists. These people only care about their ideology and anyone who doesn't blindly follow it gets defamed.

I, and I would imagine many, are tired of this sort of binary thinking. You are either part of the problem or part of the solution. Society can't function like this.
by gruez | 2025-11-06 02:12:10+00:00
>Here's how it could work. It's similar to how copyrights for music are enforced. A person whose data are found in someone's files or server can sue for "statutory" damages, which are levied on a per-offense basis.

That's not how copyright lawsuits work though. For the typical person torrenting, it's because they were caught in the act of torrenting (eg. they had a torrent client in the swarm connecting from an ip that was assigned to them). Otherwise it's a DMCA takedown and companies don't even bother suing. Nobody is getting their hard drives searched for illegal music and getting sued as a result.
by lurking_swe | 2025-11-06 02:12:31+00:00
The person i replied to had their comment flagged, but it was something to the effect of “anyone that enjoys living in a city probably suffers from mental illness.”

I’m a city dweller that thinks there is nothing wrong with the country at all. In fact I can see the charm! It’s not for me, but I can respect that lifestyle.

That’s why my reply was a little sassy, FYI.
by zzwzzw | 2025-11-06 02:12:38+00:00
This model has actually taken off in rural China. Salespeople will tell you, "You only need to lend us your roof for 20 to 30 years,and in return, you'll receive a sum of money." Many people in rural China readily agree to this deal. I'm not entirely sure what these solar panel companies get out of the arrangement. Perhaps they sell the generated electricity for a profit, or supply it to factories with high energy demands.
by anonnon | 2025-11-06 02:12:58+00:00
> When applied, the gel creates a thin and robust layer that impregnates teeth, filling holes and cracks in them.

Having an option other than crowning to treat cracks would be a game-changer, especially since the AAE not long ago put out a policy paper recommending that all teeth with cracks (even asymptomatic) receive crown coverage, which is both costly and presents a risk of inducing irreversible pulpitis and subsequent necrosis in the tooth (due to the heat and mechanical trauma of the crown prep.).
by tptacek | 2025-11-06 02:13:04+00:00
The framing of the article --- the article is fine, it's a good piece --- is weird to me because one of the original marquee use cases for XDP was for hosting providers, where virtuals are connected to physicals by way of tap interfaces, where you have to reason about the rx/tx path to do XDP at all. It's not that the article is bad, it just creates the impression that there's something weird or nonnormative about what they did, when, again, I think there's literally an xdp-tutorial example of this.

"Go ahead and do stuff like this and don't worry about whether it's a 'loophole' is I guess my whole point".
by adsharma | 2025-11-06 02:13:55+00:00
See my other comment in the thread. I would argue that anything that uses arcane dynamic stuff in python should be renamed to .dpy and the vast majority of the commonly used constructs retain .py

The issue in HN threads like this is that everyone is out to promote their own favorite language or their favorite python framework that uses dynamic stuff. The majoritarian and hacker-ethos of python don't always line up.

Like Chris Lattner was saying on a recent podcast, he wrote much of Swift at home on nights/weekends over 18 months. We need someone like that do this for spy.
by samtheDamned | 2025-11-06 02:14:16+00:00
This might be an example of what the OP was describing: https://i.redd.it/ua8lmu38f7k81.png

Besides that though Sweeney has pretty consistently been hostile to linux and it's users in the past, from discontinuing support after buying native linux games to disparaging it online. https://x.com/timsweeneyepic/status/964284402741149698?lang=... > Installing Linux is sort of the equivalent of moving to Canada when one doesn’t like US political trends. > Nope, we’ve got to fight for the freedoms we have today, where we have them today.
by cxr | 2025-11-06 02:14:49+00:00
> Mozilla's own site expounds on "Don't Break the Web" as

I'm a former Mozillian. I don't give a shit how it has been retconned by whomever happened to be writing copy that day, if indeed they have—it isn't even worth bothering to check.

"Don't break the Web" means exactly what it sounds like it means. Anything else is a lie.

> If the machine is so complex that nobody wants to maintain it, it will go unmaintained

There isn't a shortage of people willing to work on Web browsers. What there is is a finite amount of resources (in the form of compensation to engineers), and a set of people holding engineering positions at browser companies who, by those engineers' own admission, do not satisfy the conditions of being both personally qualified and equipped to do the necessary work here. But instead of stepping down from their role and freeing up resources to be better allocated to those who are equipped and willing, they're keeping their feet planted for the simple selfish reason that doing otherwise might entail a salary reduction and/or diminished power and influence. So they sacrifice the Web.

Fuck them.
by array_key_first | 2025-11-06 02:15:46+00:00
There's some paranoia here but there's also some truth.

Okay, nobody is putting in a placebo sim, but in software, we DO have placebo controls. If you flip a switch saying "don't track me", that usually means "track me slightly less". If you delete something, that doesn't mean delete it - that means keep it, but say it's deleted.

If you go through the Windows install, for instance, even if you flip off all the stuff it will tell you "we're still going to do this, just in less circumstances".

What are those circumstances? I don't know. I'm not even sure Microsoft knows.
by eru | 2025-11-06 02:16:14+00:00
Others have pointed out that QuickCheck doesn't shrink automatically. But in addition: QuickCheck's shrinking also doesn't preserve invariants (in general).

QuickCheck's shrinking is type based. There's lots of different ways to generate eg integers. Perhaps you want them in a specific range, or only prime numbers or only even numbers etc. To make QuickCheck's shrinker preserve these invariants, you'd have make a typed wrapper for each of them, and explicitly write a new shrinking strategy. It's annoying and complicated.

Hypothesis does this automatically.
by antipaul | 2025-11-06 02:17:23+00:00
I’m not sure. It could be a way to save a ton of money. Look at the investments non-Apple tech companies are making on data centers & compute.

Maybe paying Google a billion a year is still a lot cheaper?

Apple famously tries to focus on only a few things.

Still, they will continue working on their own LLM and plug it in when ready.

Edit: compare to another comment about Wang-units of currency
by martin-t | 2025-11-06 02:18:48+00:00
Very relevant: https://slatestarcodex.com/2018/07/10/melatonin-much-more-th...

Some more interesting comments: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/E4cKD9iTWHaE7f3AJ/melatonin-...

TL;DR:

- People take the wrong doses because pharmacies sell pills with huge doses, in reality 0.3 is optimal (can confirm from personal experimentation).

- People treat it like a sleeping pill when in reality it shifts the sleep cycle and it does so _depending on when you take it_. The article has various suggestions depending on your particular sleep issue.

If you use it, I suggest experimenting with the timing and dose, but especially timing - and I am talking multiple hours, up to 7, before going to sleep. And then do actually go to sleep immediately when you feel sleepy or it'll make you wake up too early and you'll be tired.
by gruez | 2025-11-06 02:18:50+00:00
>This might be an example of what the OP was describing: https://i.redd.it/ua8lmu38f7k81.png

That counts as "mocking"? You might not agree with Sweeney or think he has a good point, but it's not remotely "mocking". Are Steam supporters really that thin skinned?
by protocolture | 2025-11-06 02:21:30+00:00
>Then take into account the massive reputational downsides to having institutional investors "pull out" of your company.

I have seen black rock and others moderate their stake up and down in companies without it being even remotely newsworthy.

"BlackRock reduces stake in Sylvania Platinum to below 3%"

OMG Sylvania must be resisting the EVIL BIDEN DEI INITIATIVES!

>The institutional investors operate in lock-step

If the goal is making lots of money, probably they would have reasonably similar goals. But thats not what BlackRock gets accused of most commonly.

>you have to force behaviors

You mean this quote?

“Behaviors are going to have to change. This is one thing we’re asking companies. You have to force behaviors. At BlackRock we are forcing behaviors.”

I cant believe so many panties are knotted over a throwaway pick me inclusion quote.

Which Behaviors? Which Companies? Define Force?

Surely you cant suggest that this random linkedin article that dripped out of this idiots mouth is even remotely evidence?

>devil's advocate.

Its not really faustian advocacy to fail to understand the huge deal being made of largely nothing. I get that conservatives, especially american conservatives, are incredibly stupid and will bite down on the oldest, flimsiest whiff of bait. But to try and pretend theres anything to it at all is pure insanity.
by istjohn | 2025-11-06 02:21:32+00:00
> Let’s put aside that this isn’t good for the end user, as it openly admits the whole point of solar is great profit, rather than savings for the end user.

The whole point of capitalism is that in a well-regulated, open, competitive market, an ecosystem of companies pursuing maximum profit drive down each other's profit margins as they compete for a limited pool of consumers. In other words, it is precisely the profit motive that creates savings for the end user.
by narrator | 2025-11-06 02:22:25+00:00
All the back to the land decentralized survivalists solarpunk people can do just about everything except for rare earth refining. That's the part of solarpunk that can only happen in China because nobody anywhere wants that in their backyard. One of the more interesting political/economic questions is can a non-authoritarian country that values environmental protection do rare earth refining, or is the ecological harm in isolation too abhorrent to the members of the community where it is done to counterbalance the ecological good it does elsewhere? In an authoritarian country, you can just tell the people who live around the processing plant to relocate or suffer because it helps the environment elsewhere. In a non-authoritarian country, the local people will all reject it because it will degrade the quality of life and their land. This has been happening in the backlash against mining in Madagascar for example.
by al_be_back | 2025-11-06 02:22:35+00:00
happy anniversary!

> Uses the fast and bloat-free FLTK GUI library [1]

Bloat as a moat, is sadly the strategy of much of the web or apps in recent years. High Performance has shifted into how fast we can serve bloat. Efficiency has become about pushing the most bloat with least time.

Pages are bloated, sites are bloated, browsers are bloated, browser-market is bloated (two-a-dime! or three for free). The whole damn web is a big bloat. wtf happened.

[1] https://dillo-browser.github.io/
by tpmoney | 2025-11-06 02:22:53+00:00
OpenAI's hypocrisy on this matter is precisely why hackers should be taking this as the best opportunity we've had in decades to scale back the massive expansions that Disney et al have managed to place on copyright. But instead of taking advantage of the fact that for once someone with funding and money can go toe to toe with the big publishers and that in doing so they will be hoist on their own petard, a lot of hackers appear to be circling the wagons and suddenly finding that they think this whole "IP" thing is good actually and maybe we should make copyright even stronger.

Surely making copyright even stronger (and even expanding it to cover style as some have argued in response to the Ghibli style stuff) will have no unintended consequences going forward into a future where more and more technology is locked down by major manufacturers with a strong incentive to use and abuse IP law to prevent competition and open alternatives... right?