MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by noduerme | 2025-11-14 06:54:14+00:00
I believe I'm wired in a very similar way to the author, to need hard challenges that I can devote a great deal of focus to. And as someone who isn't burnt out but has been deeply disillusioned many times, I appreciated and enjoyed hearing that distinction made, which seems natural to me but which I had never heard framed that way before.

When I had, let's say, half a million hand-written LoC vaporize overnight for a gaming platform 26 original games I'd written on it, the feeling was much worse than burnout. Burnout implies you don't want to do the work anymore. Disillusionment - the despair and ennui of seeing something reduced to less than ash, which you spent every waking hour of your life and years of mental output and daily sacrifices perfecting and refining... that's not burnout. You wake up and say "I want to do something difficult again" but how do you even take the first step, knowing that it's all so pointless?

So I think, Cuneiform is a very apt analogy to code. Growing up in the early 80s, my older brother (16 years older) was a CS major. He gave me my first programming books, a Tandy laptop and a tape recorder. He said this:

"Remember: Everything we write as programmers is written in sand." I think he meant to tell me to make backups. But over time it became the truest observation I could make about this life of solving problems which disappear, using tools which disappear, in languages and files and thought loops that disappear.

Maybe doctors or lawyers or detectives, or other professionals who deal with serieses of episodic problems feel this way in the end, too. When a mission they were on peters out. That it's all ephemeral and temporary in a way that makes us small and meaningless...

Anyway, burnout is saying you're not interested in anything anymore. So switching to writing on clay is maybe a horizontal move, but no less satisfying.
by mrsmrtss | 2025-11-14 06:56:42+00:00
>Do you think it's acceptable that it took 4 years for Minimal APIs to get validation?

Well thay don't call it Minimal API for nothing. Jokes aside, what stopped you from calling validation yourself explicitly?

>What about hot reload being broken for years and years?

Can't comment on this, because I have never needed it. I can work faster with writing tests, but I guess it's fair to assume there are some who would need it.
by rdtsc | 2025-11-14 06:57:50+00:00
On the relationship of CIA and the media there is always the 1977 classic https://www.carlbernstein.com/the-cia-and-the-media-rolling-...

An interesting tidbit I found, somewhat related:

> Employees of so‑called CIA “proprietaries.” During the past twenty‑five years, the Agency has secretly bankrolled numerous foreign press services, periodicals and newspapers—both English and foreign language—which provided excellent cover for CIA operatives. One such publication was the Rome Daily American, forty percent of which was owned by the CIA until the 1970s. The Daily American went out of business this year,
by godelski | 2025-11-14 06:57:59+00:00
I struggled with this originally and it took years for it to click. But when it did I became both a much better programmer and mathematician for it.

I think what helps is to take the time to sit down and practice going back and forth. Remember, math and code are interchangeable. All the computer can do is math. Take some code and translate it to math, take some math and translate it to code. There's easy things to see like how variables are variables, but do you always see what the loops represent? Sums and products are easy, but there's also permutations and sometimes they're there due to lack of an operator. Like how loops can be matrix multiplication, dot products, or even integration.

I highly suggest working with a language like C or Fortran to begin with and code that's more obviously math. But then move into things that aren't so obvious. Databases are a great example. When you get somewhat comfortable try code that isn't obviously math.

The reason I wouldn't suggest a language like Python is because it abstracts too much. While it's my primary language now it's harder to make that translation because you have to understand what's happening underneath or be working with a diffident mathematical system and in my experience not many engineers (or many outside math majors) are familiar with abstract algebra and beyond so these formulations are more challenging at first.

For motivation, the benefits are that you can switch modes for when a problem is easier to solve in a different context. It happens much more than you'd think. So you end up speaking like Spanglish, or some other mixture of languages. I also find it beneficial that I can formulate ideas when out and about without a computer to type code. I also find that my code can often be cleaner and more flexible as it's clearer to me what I'm doing. So it helps a lot with debugging too

Side note: with computers don't forget about statistics and things like Monte Carlo integration. We have GPUs these days and that massive parallelism can often make slower algorithms faster :). When looking at lots of computational code it's not written for the modern massively parallel environment we have today. Just some food for thought. You might find some fun solutions but also be careful of rabbit holes lol
by thisislife2 | 2025-11-14 06:58:51+00:00
And personally, as someone who isn't American, I honestly don't see much difference between the Republicans and Democrats, apart from how they do their political propaganda. While they do try to portray themselves as different to the public, both of them are ideologically right-leaning, and even have similar spectrum of politicians as members - from conservatives to progressive. But when it comes to policies, they all have the same ideas and just bicker on how to implement it. A good and recent example of it is how the Democrats recently "caved in" on the healthcare issue with the Republicans (there was no "caving in" - many Democrats do support the Trump administration policies on healthcare). Or how the core Democrat party remains wary of Zohran Mamdani and didn't even support him.
by johnisgood | 2025-11-14 06:58:53+00:00
Cool, so we got two people here who kept saying "PGP is shit", but when asked for an alternative, they weasel out with "no thanks", or "I will not [say]"? Yeah, okay. Got it. I hope you realize it weakens everything you have said. Hell, there is nothing to weaken to begin with!

> (that the other commenter was simply wrong that the archaisms in PGP/OpenPGP are a mere consequence of GnuPG and avoidable by avoiding GnuPG)

Didn't read it like that though, it read like "OpenPGP is shit", and I could quote you where you are claiming exactly that:

> outmoded fundamentally, not just by one implementation

You said this, about OpenPGP.

Welp.
by heavyset_go | 2025-11-14 06:59:47+00:00
If it's scheduled at all, you aren't getting it without a regular prescription from a medical doctor, and its production will be highly regulated, subject to DEA limits and quotas, and patients will need to carry their prescription with them at all times if they leave their home with marijuana on them.

That's not the same thing as legalization as it's implemented elsewhere in the US.
by hagbard_c | 2025-11-14 07:00:47+00:00
This drive to turn one-time sales into repeating subscription fees has soured me even more on the concept of 'buying' (which really comes down to 'renting') software and makes it far less likely that I will ever pay to use these products. I'll go rather great lengths to avoid any software which comes with a price tag not even so much for the actual price - if I count time invested in finding, building, installing and maintaining free (as in freedom as well as beer) software alternatives to paid proprietary products it probably comes out even or more 'expensive' - but to avoid the whole licence/renew/upsell/'gold-silver-platinum-Pro-whatever' dance and the accompanying lock-in. It is a bit like how the onslaught of online advertising has turned me from being somewhat tolerant towards banner advertisements into a rabid content blocker who makes sure not a single piece of advertising ever gets to pollute my eyes or ears. Squeeze too hard and you'll find your hands empty before you realise it.
by noduerme | 2025-11-14 07:01:01+00:00
Yes of course as a reader you would read the original. The major infringement isn't the LLM directly spitting out parts of the book to an end user (a reader). It occurs when the LLM injects parts of the book into a new text, without attribution, which some other writer will go on and sell thousands of copies of. The LLM acts as the washing machine.
by dfabulich | 2025-11-14 07:02:04+00:00
That's not what I'm arguing. The argument is that "cogito ergo sum" is invalid, which is part of an argument against the existence of a "mind" above and beyond what the brain does in a living body. The atoms are all there is.

I don't think I have a "mind" above and beyond my body, and I don't think you do, either. Animals can remember stuff, solve puzzles, and express pain, just like you or I do. We do all that with our brains, not with our "minds."
by tovej | 2025-11-14 07:02:07+00:00
In a text that introduces itself with a section describing the increase in brown people, if you talk about crime in the next section, the context is brown people. And you know it, unless your reading comprehension skill is on the level of a toddler.

And the point about confusing nations and states is salient, because that is exactly what nationalists do. Using them synonymously is a rhetorical device which strengthens a nationalist conception of statehood. It lays the groundwork for ethnonationalist to further confuse the right to citizenship with ethnicity.

I'm not being pedantic here, I'm dismantling misconceptions in the premise of the discussion.
by ajb | 2025-11-14 07:02:16+00:00
The predecessor of dithering was the art of wood engraving, which reproduced the texture of illustrations in wood blocks used for printing in newspapers and books; necessarily in black and white. It's difficult to imagine now, but there was an entire industry of engravers to many of whom solely practiced engraving of others designs (often supplied drawn directly on the block to be engraved, to save time). These engravers were highly skilled and the artistry with which a piece was engraved could make a huge difference.

For example see "A treatise on wood engravings : historical and practical", by John Jackson and William Chatto, 1839[1]; here is a quote (p585 of the linked edition):

"With respect to the direction of lines, it ought at all times to be borne in mind by the wood engraver, — and more especially when the lines are not laid in by the designer, — that they should be disposed so as to denote the peculiar form of the object they are intended to represent. For instance, in the limb of a figure they ought not to run horizontally or vertically, — conveying the idea of either a flat surface or of a hard cylindrical form, — but with a gentle curvature suitable to the shape and the degree of rotundity required. A well chosen line makes a great difference in properly representing an object, when compared with one less appropriate, though more delicate. The proper disposition of lines will not only express the form required, but also produce more colour as they approach each other in approximating curves, as in the following example, and thus represent a variety of light and shade, without the necessity of introducing other lines crossing them, which ought always to be avoided in small subjects : if, however, the figures be large, it is necessary to break the hard appearance of a series of such single lines by crossing them with others more delicate."

There was even a period of a few decades after the invention of photography, during which it was not known how to mass produce photographs, and so they were manually engraved as with artworks. Eventually however, the entire profession became extinct.

[1] https://archive.org/details/treatiseonwooden00chat/page/585/.... (This is the 1881 edition)
by cess11 | 2025-11-14 07:02:21+00:00
The Church Committee also produced interesting documents.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_Committee#External_link...

As a consequence a lot of such activities were instead moved over to special operations forces, as detailed by Seth Harp in his recent book The Fort Bragg Cartel.

https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/730414/the-fort-bra...
by alex_young | 2025-11-14 07:04:09+00:00
…Sumerian, written in cuneiform, was humanity's first writing system. A language that hasn't been spoken in four thousand years. The same question circles again: Why am I doing this? Why am I trying to learn Sumerian, a language that hasn't been spoken for five thousand years?…

Watch out reader, by the end it maybe indeed turn out that Sumerian hasn’t been spoken for 10, 20, or 30 thousand years. The LLM just doesn’t know what sounds better.
by aziaziazi | 2025-11-14 07:04:42+00:00
Does that meat represent a substantial portion of the average meat consumed there? Some says the same here in Europe but still most go to the supermarket where most of the groceries aren't vegetarian, let alone vegan. I respectfully doubt there's places where people check the milk origin of their ice cream and never go to fast foods. It's great small local farmers and food-crafters exists with great quality outcome, but how do they compare in quantity with industrial meat, milk and eggs consumed in those large swaths?
by godelski | 2025-11-14 07:06:51+00:00
> Math notations, conventions and concepts usually operate under the principles of minimum description lenght.

I think you're confusing the fact that math is typically written by hand on paper or a board. That optimization is not due to math, it is due to the communication medium.

If we look at older code we'll actually see a similar thing. People are limited in character lengths so the exact same thing happened. That's why there's still conventions like 80 char text width, though now those things serve as a style guide rather than a hard rule. It also helps that we can auto complete variables.

Your criticism is misplaced.
by chrismorgan | 2025-11-14 07:10:02+00:00
A motion to dismiss amounts is saying “come on, that’s ridiculous”. Denying the motion says “no, it’s not ridiculous; we may still decide it’s wrong, but it’s not ridiculous”.

If you consider it outrageous, as OP does (and I’m inclined to agree), the fact that the judge isn’t willing to laugh it out of court is an assault on your interpretation of copyright law.
by SkiFire13 | 2025-11-14 07:10:06+00:00
> The C++ code has been around a lot longer

They made an earlier report where they found out that older C/C++ code has actually a lot less new vulnerabilities compared to new code, so I guess here they are comparing to new C/C++ code to get the higher ratio, meaning the comparison should actually be apples-to-apples.
by zdkaster | 2025-11-14 07:14:08+00:00
I completely agree. Start with what works, rough, understand it a bit deeper develop better solutions. Any trial-error, brute force or inelegant makes more natural for practioner. I think this aligns with George Pólya https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Solve_It book. The brute force is more productive and will build better intuition when you will realize the pattern and so elegant will come.
by imp0cat | 2025-11-14 07:17:18+00:00
I get 4k120Hz when connecting the output from a HDMI 2.0 port on my laptop to the HDMI 2.1 port on my TV (Sony TV, it has 4 HDMI ports, but for some reason only ports 3 and 4 support HDMI 2.1, 120Hz, VRR).
by GeorgeClensy | 2025-11-14 07:17:49+00:00
I have made a free open source minimalist android launcher to help people quit their phone addictions. It has built in screen time tracking, various customisation options like font, theme, alignments, support for widgets. It is one of the only launchers in my research to support the private space feature added in android 15. I'd appreciate it if you had a look! Thanks.
by willvarfar | 2025-11-14 07:19:51+00:00
Often, at the medium and large sized companies its not 'risk aversion', its resume padding.

Architects want to build big impressive systems that justify their position and managers want that too because success is judged by size of systems and number of staff under management, not its efficiency; its all about perverse incentives.

This is just a tax the scientists trying to use whatever the company settles on have to pay every time they wait for queries to run.

These days scientists can just suck down a copy of a bunch of data to their laptop or a cheap cloud VM and do their crunching 'locally' there. The company data swamp is just something they have to interface with occasionally.

Of course things go pear-shaped if they get detected, so don't tell anyone :D
by zkmon | 2025-11-14 07:19:58+00:00
>> Per our AI integration philosophy, we’re not against AI tools that enhance human creativity. But when it includes fake reviews, fabricated expertise, misinformation ...

There, the childish wish that you can control things the way you want to. Same as wishing that you can control which country gets the nukes. The wish that Tarzan is good and can be controlled to not to bring in humans, the wish that slaves help in work and can be controlled not to change demography, the wish that capitalism are good and can be controlled to avoid economic disparity and provide equality. When do we stop the children managing this planet?
by locknitpicker | 2025-11-14 07:19:59+00:00
> /r/kubernetes had this announcement up about five mins after it dropped at Kubecon. It's a huge deal. So many tutorials and products used ingress-nginx for basic ingress, so them throwing in the towel (but not really) is big news.

I was one of those whose first reaction was surprise, because ingress was the most critical and hardest aspect of a kubernetes rollout to implement and get up and running on a vanilla deployment. It's what cloud providers offer out of the box as a major selling point to draw in customers.

But then I browsed through the Gateway API docs, and it is a world of difference. It turns a hard problem that requires so many tutorials and products to help anyone get something running into a trivially solvable problem. The improvements on their security model is undoubtedly better and alone clearly justifies getting rid of ingress.

Change might be inconvenient, but you need change to get rid of pain points.
by dfabulich | 2025-11-14 07:20:46+00:00
I note that you keep saying "cogito" without the "ergo."

"I think therefore I am" is invalid, and what's wrong with it is the "therefore," the idea that you knew one thing, and you drew a "logical" conclusion from it, in a "prior to language" environment where words have no meaning, where "true" and "false" are indistinguishable, and logic is impossible.

Logic requires words. "Logical" means "verbal," from the Greek logos (λόγος). You can't have a logical argument (you can't draw a conclusion) from the instantaneous standpoint of someone "experiencing" cogito, where words mean whatever you want, or nothing at all.

The experience you're having is not a logical argument. As a sentence, "cogito ergo sum" is invalidated as soon as you write it down in a shared language.

I'm sure it feels right to you! But you can't actually say anything true about it in English, or Latin, or any other shared language.

Thereof, you simply must remain silent.
by alyxya | 2025-11-14 07:20:48+00:00
Unironically this is how most of us think about the world. I believe as humans we’re innately selfish and want to feel like we’re usually good or at least justified. Everyone is the protagonist of their own life and sometimes the antagonist of other people’s lives, so it’s worth considering how you could do better to others rather than continuing to justify yourself.
by Shorel | 2025-11-14 07:21:21+00:00
Ohh no, you should be able to decide which changes to commit, line by line, before committing them.

What you describe sounds like a security nightmare to me.

Maybe you are using a remote dev server, and every change you do needs to be committed before you see the result?

Please setup a local environment instead. Not even F5 should be required, you save a file, you see the result in the browser.

When your work is finished, and only then, you should commit your changes.
by gkbrk | 2025-11-14 07:21:35+00:00
Nope, it is the thing where people say "blurry" to describe "blurry".

https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/issues/7992#issuecomme...

This is how Zed looks like on my computer too. VSCode manages to render things crisply while Zed is a blurry mess.
by wryun | 2025-11-14 07:21:40+00:00
The tree mesh thing you're thinking of is actually just EasyMesh (it's a standard!). We're using prplmesh.

But yes, 11s Mesh also works. Let us know on the forum (https://community.morsemicro.com/) or via github (https://github.com/MorseMicro/) if you're having issues. Err, I work for Morse in case that wasn't clear.
Crowdsourced Prompt Engineering
by notjunior | 2025-11-14 07:23:52+00:00
Hi, i'm building promptlympics.com a platform like kaggle for prompt engineering. I'm looking for people who are willing to post prompt challenges and cash rewards. Trying to optimize prompts by hand is a huge effort so crowdsourcing it out is the way to go imo.

Is anyone interested in chatting? Please contact me thru the website
by docdeek | 2025-11-14 07:25:12+00:00
Absurdity aside, in thie specifc example Wikipedia doesn’t cite any sources.

The article (in English, anyway) is a summary of the plot of the book and there is not a footnote nor any external reference - and why would there be? It’s a summary of the plot, not a commentary or a critique of it. In this case, there’s no need to cite a source. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Game_of_Thrones
by 4ndrewl | 2025-11-14 07:25:24+00:00
Well yes, that sort of evidence is routinely used to gather evidence and build criminal cases. Emails, like letters, are correspondence between individuals.

ChatGPT isn't (despite it's name) equivalent - the nearest analogy is Google. We know the modus operandi of the world based on these services (incl social media) and privacy is the aspect that's been given up.
by blub | 2025-11-14 07:26:19+00:00
The pain will always remain when refactoring or changing code, with modifications cascading in the function and type definitions.

If a language is hard to write at first, it’s always hard to write. The saving grace of C++ is that one mustn’t use the overcomplicated functional aspects, template meta-programming, etc. Through some amazing circumstances, all of the above (or their equivalents) + async is exactly what idiomatic Rust code has become.

Inside Rust there is a not so ugly language that is struggling to come to light and it is being blocked at every step.
by brettkromkamp | 2025-11-14 07:27:09+00:00
I so recommend reading this article. It will provide you insight into a world that, I imagine, the majority of readers are not familiar with: Python development in the financial/banking system.

This is definitely not the first time this article has appeared on HN's frontpage, but every time it does, I re-read the article because I find the approach to software that the author describes in the article to be fascinating. YMMV.
by AuryGlenz | 2025-11-14 07:27:14+00:00
I just implemented it for a VR app I’ve been working on where the semi-transparent objects can appear any which way, intersecting, etc. I didn’t realize how much of an issue that’d be…or how hard it’d be to come up with a shader for dithering in VR that doesn’t look awful. I’m still not super happy with what I have - it moves along with the player’s eyes - but every other solution I could come up with didn’t interact well with two screens, especially at far distances from the object. Moire for days.