MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by hennell | 2025-11-27 08:58:52+00:00
It doesn't seem that confusing. The blog post says that they "proactively communicated with all impacted customers" not that they've only emailed impacted customers. Recieving an email doesn't imply you were affected, just that the lack of all email saying "you were affected" means you were not impacted by this event.

In the event you had closed your account a year ago they may have deleted your information from their systems. No way for you to be impacted, but also no way to tell you that, so the lack of the email is the message in that case.
by qsort | 2025-11-27 09:00:03+00:00
What the hell is this?

The linked paper: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2505.20314 claims the squiggles they introduce are apparently a model to solve Levy-optimal parallel reduction of lambda terms.

But the author has no affiliation, it's very weird they're calling this "lambda-reduction" and it heavily smells of AI slop?

I hope I'm wrong but it doesn't look right. Can anyone with expertise in this field chime in?
by f_klem | 2025-11-27 09:00:20+00:00
I just clicked... indeed, the article is so misinformed that even some simple half-trues (whatever that might be) mentioned in the article are completely out of place... But this kind of articles show me a different problem: the relation between seniority and expertise. I'm growing tired of an industry where more years of 'experience' is conflated with more expertise. Maybe one of the culprits is not OO itself (which I personally do not regard as a bad paradigm), but the myriad of really bad and lousy texts and examples teaching and explaining OO concepts: I think there is out there a complete generation of developers that just don't design good software.
by patates | 2025-11-27 09:01:05+00:00
Thanks for the thoughtful response.

> Your argument is lacking nuance, declaring that the criticism being levied here must be a simple binary.

That isn't my argument. I am arguing against the idea that there is an "objective" threshold of failure where, once crossed, it becomes acceptable to call people names.

> Customers of Github should be infuriated that Github gleefully foists such utterly defective software upon them. It is hard to get that across in dispassionate writing.

See, while it has its bugs, I don't see a major problem with GitHub as a software product (setting aside the monopoly concerns). I encourage passionate discussion, but calling people names doesn't communicate passion; it communicates impatience. It suggests you don't have the patience to actually make a case for something you're supposedly passionate about, so you're choosing a shorter, more aggressive form instead.
by gyulai | 2025-11-27 09:01:46+00:00
> Here's someone trying [...] don't complain when someone tries doing exactly that.

From this site, we have no indication that any actual person is putting any kind of good-faith effort towards trying any actual thing.

All we know is that a bunch of marketers are trying to find out: Given a certain amount of marketing effort, how many people can we sign up to a mailing list, and how many people can we get to pay a $99 reservation fee, if the product proposition is: You'll get a slick-looking "Developer-Terminal" (specifics to be determined) for $1.999. -- Based on that, they will decide whether they will lift a finger to figure out what the product should actually be, let alone put any resources towards developing it.

That's where the negativity comes from. They are eroding people's good will. Good will that is sorely needed when actual companies make actual products and need actual consumers to pay attention to actual product launches.
by CrazyCompiler01 | 2025-11-27 09:02:46+00:00
Hi HN,

I built a small project over the weekend and wanted to share it here. It’s called AuthenticImage — a tool that analyzes an image and tells you if it’s AI-generated, edited/manipulated, or unsafe. Link: https://authenticimage.site/

The main idea was simple: AI-generated images are everywhere now, and there isn’t a straightforward way for regular users (or even developers) to check if a photo is real, fake, or modified. So I stitched together a few detection models into a unified pipeline and built a fast, no-signup interface.

What it does right now:

Detects AI-generated content (Stable Diffusion, Midjourney, etc.)

Detects manipulated/edited images

Flags unsafe content (nudity, violence, gore, etc.)

Runs in ~100ms on average

No account required, completely free during early development

I quietly put it online to see if anyone would find it. Unexpectedly, around 100 people used it on the first day, even without any marketing or posts. That made me think there might be an actual need for a lightweight image authenticity checker.

A few things I’m trying to understand:

Who needs this the most? (journalists, marketplaces, dating apps, educators?)

What matters more: accuracy, speed, or explainability?

Should this evolve into an API, a browser extension, or a standalone consumer product?

Right now it’s just an early MVP. I’d appreciate:

brutally honest feedback

failure cases

feature suggestions

accuracy expectations

thoughts on whether this is worth turning into a serious project

I’m happy to share how the pipeline works internally if anyone’s curious.

Thanks!
by shevy-java | 2025-11-27 09:03:31+00:00
I am always so peaceful when listening to heavy metal ... :D

I think the article should focus more on good music elements versus bad music elements. My brain gets annoyed at bad music. Good music can be useful though, in particular for relaxing. I normally dislike jazz-elements, but Sade for instance is acceptable (not pure jazz, but she uses jazzy elements).
by imiric | 2025-11-27 09:03:38+00:00
It's a bit patronizing to tell people what to do with their money. If you care more about the environment than enjoying technology, then go ahead and do what you suggest. If you want to be really green, how about giving up technology altogether? Go full vegan, abandon all possessions, and all that? Or if you really want to help the planet, have you considered suicide?

There's always more you can do. I'd rather enjoy my life, and not tell others how to enjoy theirs, unless it's impacting mine. Especially considering that the impact of a single middle-class individual pales in comparison to the impact of corporations and absurdly wealthy individuals. Your rant would be better served to representatives in government than tech nerds.
by andyjohnson0 | 2025-11-27 09:03:38+00:00
Interesting article, and he sounds like a clever (and, as the article says) humble guy.

> On the way home from one of those trips, Whitfield had an idea. “He was on an airplane, and he whipped out a tablet and basically drew out the whole schematic of how the clean room should work,” said Whitfield’s son Jim, who was 6 years old at the time. “It was just a simple sketch. It just took a few minutes, and it’s the basic principle that is still used today.”

This was in 1960 and he clearly drew it on paper. So is/was "tablet" a common term for a pad of paper? I've never heard it used in any context other than a slab of stone or a derivation of such.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tablet#Inscription,_printing,_...

Minor point but struck me as odd.
by dagmx | 2025-11-27 09:03:41+00:00
You’re conflating target version with minimum supported version.

There aren’t requirements to update the minimum. They’re independent. There might be limitations on what APIs are still available though in Xcode if they’re removed after a deprecation period however.

You can use the latest SDK, and if you don’t use any new APIs, your app will continue to deploy to whatever minimum you have set.

If you want to use the new APIs, you can put their use behind availability checks.

It’s just that at some point, as a dev, you want to stop testing on older devices and you want to stop branching your code for OS versions that are a minuscule fraction of the active user base. The ROI changes quickly.
by noodletheworld | 2025-11-27 09:03:55+00:00
> I just don't like how they have to put out false claims like there are big problems with GH CI and Sponsors

These aren't false claims.

Thats my point.

Microsoft can afford to make these tools better; they just dont care.

Yes, its better than having nothing, but honestly you have to be wearing blinkers not to see the decline rn.
by jacquesm | 2025-11-27 09:04:13+00:00
> In the event you had closed your account a year ago they may have deleted your information from their systems.

Given what I know about data life cycle implementations there is a very good chance that that data was still there unless the GP explicitly requested it be deleted.

Companies tend to hang on to all kinds of data that they shouldn't have.

The fact that they received an email is a first indication that it wasn't deleted.
by bitwize | 2025-11-27 09:04:41+00:00
Farm work was grueling, lasted pretty much from dawn till dusk, took an enormous physical toll on the body, and you never know when a bad crop or unfavorable weather might mean you starve.

I'm descended from farm folk. I have relatives living who still are. I'm proud of that heritage, but let's not romanticize things. There's a reason the song doesn't go "How ya gonna keep 'em down in Paree after they've seen the farm?"
by freehorse | 2025-11-27 09:06:29+00:00
As humans, we appreciate also the process in making things, not just the end result. For art this is especially more important than for everyday, for practical use products. The more one knows about a specific kind of art and can relate to the experience of making such art, the more they are usually interested in parts of the process because the more information they can extract about the piece of art. That also often gives new perspectives in the art piece itself. Art (and many other things) is much about contextualizing. Contextualizing an art piece to a specific process of making it or a specific era that was made may help notice details that would otherwise go unnoticed. Perception is not neutral and cannot be, and art appreciation even less.

Yes it is true that some may try to trick people with fake information about the process of producing something, but that does not mean that the reason people may be interested in the process itself is marketing. It is part of the human condition and experience imo that some may try to take advantage of, but is important otherwise.
by testdelacc1 | 2025-11-27 09:07:13+00:00
Here’s a “high performer” realising that it was his toxicity that was the problem, and he needs to fix it.

> This week people in our community confronted me about my lifetime of not understanding emotions. My flippant attacks in emails have been both unprofessional and uncalled for.

> Especially at times when I made it personal. In my quest for a better patch, this made sense to me. I know now this was not OK and I am truly sorry. The above is basically a long-winded way to get to the somewhat painful personal admission that hey, I need to change some of my behavior, and I want to apologize to the people that my personal behavior hurt and possibly drove away from kernel development entirely.

And he did. And the project he heads is better for it. You don’t need to call people names to run a project well. Linus learned that. It’s time that other people who failed to grow up learn it too.
by olllo | 2025-11-27 09:07:25+00:00
Hi HN! I’m excited to share the newest version of Data.olllo, a local AI workflow automator for data processing, visualization, and reusable workflows.

What’s new • Next-gen workflow engine: Build, save, and reuse workflows for any dataset • AI-assisted automation: Generate steps or entire pipelines with AI agents • Full local processing: Secure, offline, with no raw data sent to the cloud • Scalable: Works from small CSVs to multi-GB datasets

Why it’s useful • Clean, transform, and visualize data without writing code • Apply saved workflows to similar datasets instantly • Ideal for repetitive tasks, analytics, ecommerce data, logs, or any large dataset

Get it

Website / Download: https://olllo.top

I’d love feedback from the HN community on this updated version, especially on workflow automation and AI-assisted data tasks.
by binsquare | 2025-11-27 09:07:59+00:00
Co-builder on this project,

To answer your questions :)

- How would I use these microVms and what is the cloudflare worker for?

This is unlikely the right solution for you, it's more geared towards people building kilocode (because they have an agent that independently writes code + executes that code).

The microvm's are for developers running locally wanting to execute untrusted code written by an ai - example is running codex or gemini-cli. Cloudflare workers are for users who want their own "sandbox infra" so they can execute untrusted code written by ai with their production app (not local hopefully)!

- I currently run a regular set of docker containers to run my code, how does this compare?

Very little difference for your use case unless you expect to do more hostile coding.

But I'll try to explain why VM's are different than containers in the security area:

Containers are not considered as production-level security boundary. One of the main reason is because containers share the kernel with the host machine running the container.

Security penetration engineers do not consider exploiting `some` linux kernels to be high effort because depending on the version, libraries, etc there are CVE's to exploit: https://www.cisa.gov/known-exploited-vulnerabilities-catalog...

However, virtual machines are battle tested sandbox tech designed to have strong protection by having host and the VM have individual operating systems AND dedicated virtualized hardware. This is also the main environment you can rent from big providers. Some more info here: https://www.wiz.io/academy/containers-vs-vms

So this product is a microVM which combines security of VM's + a layer to make it easy and fast like containers to get the best of both worlds.
by kristoff_it | 2025-11-27 09:09:46+00:00
GitHub Actions are seriously broken and that alone is a technically sound enough reason to move: the sleep.sh bullshit has degraded the performance of our CI for a long time, as it regularly livelocks in an endless while(true) spin runner agents, who stop processing new jobs. The agent itself has poor platform support also because it has a runtime dependency on .NET, and lately GH Actions started running jobs out of order with the result that old jobs would starve and time out, causing PRs to turn up red for no real reason.

It's a real problem to run a project like Zig if your CI doesn't work. I guess we could have paid for an external CI service, but that as well would depend on GitHub APIs, so we would have gained what, a couple years? Given the current trajectory of GitHub I wouldn't trust them to maintain those APIs correctly for any longer than that (and as far as I know the current vibe-scheduling issues might already be reflected in the APIs that third party CI providers would use).

Let's not forget that "GitHub is an AI company now".
by atenni | 2025-11-27 09:10:26+00:00
> I agree it would have been nicer if the message was more polite. But if you compare that to having the backbone follow through with meaningful long-term changes against a corporation you don't trust or respect, there shouldn't even be a discussion.

You’re framing it as either/or when it isn’t. You can push for real change and communicate like an adult. The two aren’t in conflict; often they reinforce each other.
by friendzis | 2025-11-27 09:10:56+00:00
The reality in most businesses is constant roll from fighting one immediate crisis to another and handwaving future risks on "business environment may change" and "not important right now". The more crises one "mitigates", the more competent they are seen, even if they have directly caused the crisis in question.

If you talk about an upcoming shitshow you are generally seen as not entrepreneurial, if you mitigate a risk before it becomes a crisis that crisis is not viewed as crisis. However, if you let a crisis happen and "successfully" manage it you are seen as a hero.
by inglor_cz | 2025-11-27 09:11:02+00:00
Tito was, by all accounts, a very capable politician, but he also built a system that, 10 years after his death, disintegrated in a fountain of blood.

I like systems that withstood some test of time and adversary winds. Titoist Yugoslavia didn't.

OK, so you like the concept of worker self-management. At the same time, you admire the economic power of the US and China. Neither seems to be based on worker self-management.

Worker cooperatives are legal in most of the world, but regardless of local specifics, they seem to have trouble crossing a certain productivity level. The largest one is located in Basque country, where a local feeling of nationalism and somewhat of a siege mentality re larger nations (France, Spain) might have fueled its size. In general, cooperatives have trouble holding on to their best talent, because it can get better wages elsewhere.

If worker cooperatives were a globally competitive institution, we would see a lot more of them.
by eithed | 2025-11-27 09:11:23+00:00
The argument I'm trying to make is that hiring a real person or using LLMs has upsides and downsides. People have their own agendas, can leave, can affect your business in many ways, unrelated to code etc, but also can learn, can be creative and address problems that you've not even surfaced. LLM will not and will not be capable of that.

With LLMs you know what you're going to get to a certain value. Will it not listen to you? No. Will it not follow your instructions? Maybe. Will it produce unmaintainable garbage? Most certainly. Does that matter for nondevs? Sometimes
by jwr | 2025-11-27 09:12:05+00:00
I love the fact that somebody tries to do something with computers and computing!

Rather than being the usual bunch of grumpy armchair critics (raah raah, too expensive, raah raah, suboptimal GPU), we should be happy that there are still people who are willing to ignore the Statlers & Waldorfs of HN and try to compete with the current status quo.
by Gigachad | 2025-11-27 09:12:29+00:00
I’ve tried the paid models through GitHub copilot and I just can’t find any of them actually useful for anything more than generating tests.

They can generate stuff, but generally I spend so long fixing it manually that it makes the time savings zero or negative.

Only thing I have found useful is the PR review bot. That thing is genuinely incredible at spotting tiny mistakes in massive PRs that make your eyes glaze over.
by jacquesm | 2025-11-27 09:13:43+00:00
Ok, I'll take a stab at that:

I would expect such a critical piece of code to be able to hot-load and validate a new configuration before it is put into action. I would expect such a change to be rolled out gradually, or at least as gradually as required to ensure that it functions properly before it is able to crash the system wholesale.

I can't say without a lot more knowledge about the implementation and the context what the best tools would be to achieve this but I can say that crashing a presently working system because of a config fuckup should not be in the range of possible expected outcomes.

Because config fuckups are a fact of life so config validation before release is normal.
by atoav | 2025-11-27 09:14:07+00:00
As someone who modeled surfaces like this for a living:

G0 Positional Continuity: The surfaces touch without gap, but there may be a sharp corner. Example: the corners of a cube G1 Tangential Continuity: G0 but additionally the surfaces have the same slope (are tangential) at the point where they touch. Example: adding a circular fillet to the corners of a cube

This is where most basic CAD modellers would stop. The problem with just putting a cylindrical or a spherical fillet in a corner is that you basically go from a flat surface (zero curvature) to a surface with some curvature on a whim. If your surface is reflective that means you go from a flat mirror to a strongly distorting one instantly, this will visually appear as a edge even if there is none. Curvature btw. is just the reciprocal of radius (1/r)

If we talk about forces (e.g. imagine a skateboard ramp) you go flat (no centripetal force) to circular (constant centripetal force) without any transition inbetween. In effect this will feel like a bump that can throw inexperienced skateboarders of their feet.

This means tangential transitions often do not cut it.

G2 Continuity: In addition to being G0 and G1 you additionally ensure the curvature is the same where both surfaces meet. This usually means instead of going from a flat surface into a circle you go into a curve that starta out flat and then bends slowly into a radius.

Now the curvature of a curve can be drawn as a curvature comb. You basically take the curvature at any point of the curve and draw the value as the length of a line that is perpendicular to the curve.

G1 is if the perpendicular lines at the ends of the two curves align. G2 is if the curvature comb at the end of the two lines additionally has the same height (indicating the same curvature at the transition point).

G3 is basically just ensuring that the two curvature combs are tangential at the point where they meet. G4 is ensuring that the curvature combs are not only tangential, but have the same curvature. G5 is taking the curvature of the curvature...

By this point you may be able to sense a pattern.
by jwr | 2025-11-27 09:14:20+00:00
It's funny how price triggers people. Let them price their products however they will :-)

As a counterpoint, EP-133 (KO-II) is a very interestingly designed product that is ergonomic, quite useful, and gets a specific job done very, very well. The price also has fewer digits, so perhaps it doesn't trigger people as much as other products do.
by o1bf2k25n8g5 | 2025-11-27 09:16:03+00:00
I picture it as a legal pad, more or less. If I really think about it, I imagine a "legal pad" as having that very specific paper (lined, with that nice margin), whereas a "tablet" could perhaps be any type of paper bound together in that same way.

I'm not entirely sure where I got these impressions from over the years, though I certainly used to use a lot of legal pads. I still really like stumbling across a nice one in the wild, even if I usually just get them from Amazon nowadays. (Aside: Is it just me, or are legal pads not as good these days as they used to be?)

Anyway, from this bit on Wikipedia about legal pads, it seems like that is one origin story for using "tablet" in this context: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Notebook#Legal_pad

Notably, from the last sentence of that story:

> ...he glued together a stack of halved sheets of paper, supported by a sheet of cardboard, creating what he called the "Silver City Writing Tablet".
by piva00 | 2025-11-27 09:16:11+00:00
I'm finding a good balance by only relying on LLMs for the stuff that used to make me stuck because it was just boring to do, the process of reading code, reasoning about it, and designing in my head a solution is still absolutely needed; after that it's quite easy to start hammering out a solution, sometimes I'd get a bit stuck if I noticed it would need some major changes across multiple places, I can let a LLM do that for me and get back on track.

What I can't stand even though I tried quite a bit is talking to the damn clanker at length to describe step-wise what I believe needs to be done, and keep waiting, reviewing, telling it what's wrong, waiting, reviewing, I don't think I'm at a stage where I have the mental capacity to be running dozens of clankers at once doing all their changes on their own, and just reviewing later. It's absolutely exhausting and joyless, I've tried, and at the moment it's not for me.