MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by margalabargala | 2025-11-20 17:08:56+00:00
That's not quite how EMPs work. The wire traces act as antennas, and long wires like power transmission lines will have huge power surges, and small devices like calculators will have basically none. The miniscule increase in length of conductive material if the battery happens to be conducting at the moment won't impact the amount of current induced.

Solar EMPs won't be powerful enough to impact electronics. A nuclear EMP can impact electronics, but only over a small geographic area; close enough that if you are in the electronics-frying radius of a nuclear weapon explosion, you either have much larger problems to worry about, or nothing at all to worry about ever again.

Here's info from Los Alamos Lab on it: https://www.lanl.gov/media/publications/national-security-sc...
by esafak | 2025-11-20 17:09:09+00:00
That is an interesting error actually. It happened because both orientations of the sword are visually plausible, but not abrupt transitions from one to the other; there needs to be physical continuity.

Here is a reproduction of the Matrix bullet time shot with and without pose guidance to illustrate the problem: https://youtu.be/iq5JaG53dho?t=1125
by jacquesm | 2025-11-20 17:10:15+00:00
Yes, but if you think of a ship once underway when the engine fails as an unguided ballistic missile with a mass that is absolutely mind boggling (the Dali masses 100,000 tonnes) there isn't much that you could build that would stop it. The best suggestion I've seen is to let the ship run aground but that ignores the situation around the area where the accident happened.

This ship wasn't towed by a tug, it was underway under its own power and in order for the ship to have any control authority at all it needs water flowing over the rudder.

Without that forward speed you're next to helpless and these things don't exactly turn on a dime. So even if there had been a place where it could have run aground it would never have been able to reach it because it was still in the water directly in front of the passage way under the bridge.

100,000 tonnes doing 7 Kph is a tremendous amount of kinetic energy.

The exact moment the systems aboard the Dali failed could not have come at a worse time, it had - as far as I'm aware of the whole saga - just made a slight course correction to better line up with the bridge and the helm had not yet been brought back to neutral. After that it was just Newton taking over, without control I don't think there is much that would have stopped it.

This is a good plot of the trajectory of the vessel from the moment it went under way until the moment it impacted the bridge:

https://www.pilotonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/5HVqi...

You can clearly see the kink in the trajectory a few hundred meters before it hit the bridge.
by euroderf | 2025-11-20 17:10:32+00:00
> In the 1970s, states emptied mental hospitals without funding alternatives, pushing thousands of people with serious needs into cheap downtown hotels unequipped to support them.

In the runup to this, there were stories appearing regularly of people being committed to institutions against their will, and without valid cause. In other words, putting someone away for other people's convenience (or financial benefit).

I interpreted the outflow of mental patients as an unexpected side effect of efforts to halt the above-mentioned abuses. Of course it's also possible that reform of abuses was used as a cover for simple, unintelligent budget cutting.
by johnisgood | 2025-11-20 17:10:56+00:00
You are listing edge cases that exist, but the relevant question is whether they meaningfully apply to Firefox profile migration on typical systems.

Same-disk detection can be done through stat() on both paths and comparing st_dev, which is trivial. But more importantly, why does this matter for migration? If it is cross-filesystem, copy and move works fine. If you are concerned about atomicity, that is a different problem, but Firefox profiles are not typically manipulated concurrently during a migration that happens once at startup.

Partial copy cleanup is reasonable, but again, context matters. For a one-time migration triggered at browser start with exclusive access to the profile, you verify checksums or sizes post-copy, and if verification fails, you do not delete the source. User gets an error, tries again later. Not complex.

As for overwrites: do not overwrite if target exists. Check once before starting. If the XDG path already has data, skip migration entirely or prompt. This is not a continuous sync operation.

FWIW "cp -a" preserves access rights on Unix. On Windows, ACLs can be trickier but for user-owned profiles it is usually a non-issue.

The real complexity in robust file operations show up with network filesystems (SMB, NFS), concurrent access patterns, or where atomicity guarantees are critical (and a move operation is indeed atomic, assuming typical systems). For a single-user profile migration that happens once with exclusive lock? The corner cases you mentioned are either straightforward to handle or do not apply.
by panarky | 2025-11-20 17:11:20+00:00
> a real photo taken with their phone's camera

How "real" are iPhone photos? They're also computationally generated, not just the light that came through the lens.

Even without any other post-processing, iPhones generate gibberish text when attempting to sharpen blurry images, they delete actual textures and replace them with smooth, smeared surfaces that look like a watercolor or oil paintings, and combine data from multiple frames to give dogs five legs.
by giantg2 | 2025-11-20 17:11:26+00:00
If you set it up as a charity or something, then maybe you could. Otherwise, there's still likely $100+ in property tax per occupant per month even on a dorm sized space. That's before utilities, upkeep, paying off construction, admin costs, etc. Just look at what they charge for dorm rooms, and many of those aren't even in expensive areas.
by andrewla | 2025-11-20 17:11:29+00:00
I'm not convinced at the narrative presented here, thought it seems compelling and worthy of further research.

My understanding was that it was the tenant rights movement that killed SROs and boarding houses by making it practically impossible to keep them orderly, because it made eviction almost impossible and compliance with anti-discrimination laws presented too large a burden for low-cost housing.

And rather than being refuges for same-sex couples and generally "[offering liberation from family supervision and the constraints of Victorian mores", they were the opposite -- often being extremely stringent in "morality" clauses and forbidding mixed company after dark. They were frequently racially exclusionary in ways that became incompatible with civil rights laws.

The reality is that the situation was probably a mix of both attacks -- attacks through over-regulation and tenant rights, as well as direct attacks on SROs as hotbeds of crime and illicit or immoral behavior, but I'm curious as to the mechanics of how this came to be.
by igouy | 2025-11-20 17:11:50+00:00
> Chez Scheme shoud be in between

? The default implementation as of Racket version 8.0 uses Chez Scheme as its core compiler and runtime system.

https://docs.racket-lang.org/reference/implementations.html

> some C programs use very advanced low level tricks

* possible hand-written vector instructions or "unsafe" or naked ffi" are flagged

https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/...
by wuyhthu | 2025-11-20 17:12:08+00:00
https://www.yuanhao.site/post/ai-weekly/2025-11-19-weekly-en...

Our team's interviews have shifted from leetcode problems to implementing complete features—impossible to finish without AI.

This change is redefining what makes an excellent engineer: communication skills (including with AI), taste, and tool mastery have become core competencies.

The most impressive candidate I interviewed: he would predict where AI would modify the code before it started working, then immediately verify the output. This ability to "command AI" is what engineers need in the new era. Technical depth still matters, but how it manifests has changed.
by fwip | 2025-11-20 17:12:27+00:00
I'm not sure that's correct. I'm not an expert, but there's a lot of literature on digital watermarks that are robust to manipulation.

It may be easier if you have an oracle on your end to say "yes, this image has/does not have the watermark," which could be the case for some proposed implementations of an AI watermark. (Often the use-case for digital watermarks assumes that the watermarker keeps the evaluation tool secret - this lets them find, e.g, people who leak early screenings of movies.)
by j_cmack | 2025-11-20 17:12:58+00:00
I like the continuous recalculation approach you’re thinking about - it would be helpful knowing that what I’m invested in is constantly being re-aligned towards my goals. Not sure if beginner investors will really care about this - it may be a bit advanced. But if the platform is targeted towards prosumers or people who are already investing, I can see the appeal. How is the no-custody aspect managed? Everyone makes trades on their own?
by Aurornis | 2025-11-20 17:12:59+00:00
> a willingness to kick out problematic tenants. The Y has a zero-alcohol policy, and will kick you out with no notice for violation. Tenant's rights laws and social norms make this much harder today.

You probably brought up the biggest problem with making this model work today.

In the 1920s the threat of being evicted rapidly for violations was real and present. Either you follow the rules or you’re getting kicked to the street.

Modern tenant laws are unbelievably protective of tenants and require extremely long periods to evict people. I know someone who spent months and tens of thousands of dollars trying to evict squatters who broke into their house while they were doing some construction work on it. If it takes months to kick non-paying tenants who were never invited out of a place you own, it would be a nightmare to try to evict people from an SRO fast enough to keep any peace.
by vunderba | 2025-11-20 17:13:08+00:00
> The model generates up to two interim images to test composition and logic. The last image within Thinking is also the final rendered image.

I've been using a bespoke Generative Model -> VLM Validator -> LLM Prompt Modifier REPL as part of my benchmarks for a while now so I'd be curious to see how this stacks up. From some preliminary testing (9 pointed star, 5 leaf clover, etc) - NB Pro seems slightly better than NB though it still seems to get them wrong. It's hard to tell what's happening under the covers.
by dragonwriter | 2025-11-20 17:13:11+00:00
No, while abstractly “X is an asshole” can be a statement of literal fact, in the concrete case where X is a person capable of bringing a defamation suit, it is not realistically possible that “X is an asshole” can be interpreted by a reasonable member of the audience (listener, reader, etc., depending on media) as such a statement; it clearly is a subjective statement of opinion of character.

Meanwhile, a pedophile is something that a person capable of bringing a defamation suit could also literally be, and where a reasonable member of the audience for a description of them as such might (given the right other circumstances) view the description as a literal fact claim.
by bayindirh | 2025-11-20 17:13:18+00:00
The amount of polish is dependent on the tipping alloy of the particular nib.

For example Lamy’s tipping alloy is softer than others, so that polishing becomes excessive to the point of changing nib size. I have an old safari which writes broad after ten years of use (the nib is marked medium).

Pilot and Sailor uses harder tipping alloys. Schmidt is also harder than Lamy, but softer than Japanese counterparts.

(Yes, I have a lot of pens for quite some time :) )
by _DeadFred_ | 2025-11-20 17:13:19+00:00
Once someone decides their intelligence guarantees their correctness, they stop questioning themselves. There was conversation here about Israel starving Gaza, and they Israel needed to provide for Gaza like the USA did for Germany, that that was acceptable/gold standard treatment of an occupied populace. When I looked up the numbers, and Israel was actually during starvation providing more calories per person than the USA did Germany, I was instantly downvoted and told people need more calories. Just for providing actual context to comments that were routinely being made.

Edit: I'm post rate limited from replying below. HN routinely chose to whitelist flagged Gaza discussions, but didn't whitelist comments of people who stated the minority opinion and whose comments were completely flagged into invisibility. If you arrived late and didn't get to read the original non-offensive but viewpoint challenging comments, you would assume everything from the 'wrong' viewpoint was so unhinged it had to be flagged, but many were just 'wrongthink' and not 'flag to invisibility' worthy. Or that there was group consensus on the discussion (obviously people just learned to stop posting on those threads if you had wrongthink).

Not sure how moderation can intervene, remove the topic flag and say it's 'a worthwhile discussion for HN' when the same moderation allows views/challenge of the narrative to be flagged to invisibility. It becomes more pontification than discussion at that point.
by palata | 2025-11-20 17:13:53+00:00
> Frankly, I still trust this model much more than black box Android apps automatically updating in the background, sending tons of telemetry and demanding random permissions so they can spy on you.

You're comparing a security model to... apps? I don't see how that makes sense.

Apps you install on Linux can do more than apps you install on Android, period. That's part of the security model.

Of course I like that I am an admin on my computer, but I don't need that on my phone. And one can enable root on Android and still keep the apps sandboxed...
by bayarearefugee | 2025-11-20 17:14:05+00:00
> AI is fake, it feels fake, and it’s obvious.

True pretty much across the board for all generative AI, IMO.

I do understand why people get somewhat enamored with it when they first encounter it because there is a superficial magic to it when you first start using it.

But use it for a while (or view the output of other people's uses) and all the limitations and repetitiveness starts to become pretty obvious, and then after a while that's all you see.
by thunderbong | 2025-11-20 17:14:13+00:00
A bit off-topic, but it's been increasingly tough to view Calvin and Hobbes on the internet.

Gocomics seems to go after everyone who posts these comic strips on a regular basis.

The C&H sub-reddit stopped posting some time ago. [0]

The only C&H Search out there is not allowed to show the strips and instead redirects to Gocomics. [1]

Here's a blog post by S. Anand detailing some background on the takedown notice he received, although he doesn't mention who sent it. [2]

I feel saddened that the one comic strip that resisted commercialization has to have its fans face this.

But I suppose that's the nature of the web now.

[0]: https://www.reddit.com/r/calvinandhobbes/comments/1m8j09a/th...

[1]: https://michaelyingling.com/random/calvin_and_hobbes/

[2]: https://www.s-anand.net/blog/the-calvin-and-hobbes-search-ta...
by dahart | 2025-11-20 17:14:27+00:00
Oh yeah, knowing the difference between the runtime API and driver API is definitely an issue, and there is common confusion around that. But that’s not an overloaded word problem, right? I wasn’t trying to say there’s no confusion, and I do think understanding the terms in the article is super helpful. To your point, I think there’s justification for needing a codex like this article has without framing it as an overloaded terminology problem.
by maratc | 2025-11-20 17:14:43+00:00
> They are two countries in reality

It only looks like this from the West, where the support for independent Taiwan is much higher than in Taiwan itself (not to speak of PRC where it's non-existent.) People in Taiwan don't perceive China as a different country (the way that French perceive Germany for example) but rather as a different (unfortunate) regime over the same nation.

> This atlas is presumably supposed to be about reality, not about legal fictions.

With the current reality in east Ukraine/Georgia/Northern Cyprus/Israel-Palestine/Kosovo/etc.etc.etc., I'm not sure if it's ever possible to get a map that will satisfy everybody, as what is "legal fiction" to you might be "internationally recognised borders" for someone else.
by user_of_the_wek | 2025-11-20 17:15:16+00:00
No, I think you are misunderstanding. IQ does not describe the likelihood of someone being that smart. It just means you order a number of people by their „intelligence“, the one in the middle is defined as 100 and then it depends on how many other people are in that line which IQ number the person at the end of the line gets. So it’s impossible because the definition of IQ is such that a certain number doesn’t come up without a certain number of measurements.

It‘s as if you would say 150% of all people are female. That is impossible, not just unlikely.
by embedding-shape | 2025-11-20 17:15:33+00:00
I tried the same prompt as one of the examples (https://i.imgur.com/iQTPJzz.png), in the two ways they say you can run it, via Google Gemini and Google AI Studio (I suppose they're different somehow?). The prompt was "Create an infographic that shows hot to make elaichi chai" and Google Gemini created a infographic (https://i.imgur.com/aXlRzTR.png), but it was all different from what the example showed. Google AI Studio instead created a interactive website, again with different directions: https://i.imgur.com/OjBKTkJ.png

There is not a single mention about accuracy, risks or anything else in the blogpost, just how awesome the thing is. It's clearly not meant to be reliable just yet, but not making this clear up front. Isn't this almost intentionally misleading people, something that should be illegal?
by kragen | 2025-11-20 17:15:43+00:00
Paragraph 25 describes what this is all about:

> Dr Garrett is chiefly accused of an online campaign of material which is (variously) criminal, illegal or offensive. The criminal matters alleged include cybercrime, hate crime, blackmail, issuing threats of violence or death, and matters adjacent to terrorism. Other illegal matters alleged include defamation, harassment and online abuse. Offensive matters alleged include material that is variously racist, antisemitic, misogynist, homophobic or otherwise hateful or discriminatory, sexually incontinent, or drugs-related. Dr Garrett is alleged to have waged this campaign through the medium of IRC ‘sockpuppet’ accounts – accounts under pseudonymous user nicknames intended to be a vehicle for distributing material anonymously and deniably. Many posts from these accounts are reproduced in the articles complained of. Dr Garrett is also repeatedly alleged to be an uncontrolled user of illegal class A drugs, principally crack cocaine.

The evidence for the allegations was apparently very thin (¶¶59–60):

> First, the defence relies on an incident a few years prior to the sockpuppet campaign, in which Dr Garrett admittedly registered himself online in two borrowed names for the purpose of making a rhetorical or satirical point about the owner of those names. Dr Garrett’s evidence is that he did so openly, and with the knowledge of the owner (who had himself vacated the names in order to borrow another user’s nickname – which was in part Dr Garrett’s point in also doing so). Dr Schestowitz clearly takes exception to that particular piece of theatricality as a major breach of netiquette in its own right, and regards it as a sign or symptom of propensity for sockpuppetry. But the incident in question, on its face, is plainly something quite different from the covert use of sockpuppet accounts to publish illegal or offensive material, and is not in my judgment capable of indicating any sort of propensity to do that.

> Second, it is said there was an incident in which Dr Garrett’s own named account and one of the sockpuppet accounts experienced simultaneous dropped connections. If established, that could indicate dual operation by a single individual. The evidence from the Claimant is that the dropped connections were not in fact simultaneous. I have no evidential basis for doing otherwise than proceeding on that basis. This pleading cannot in the circumstances support an inference of Dr Garrett’s authorship of the sockpuppet posts.

¶¶61–75 have further, even weaker evidence.
by wave84 | 2025-11-20 17:16:02+00:00
Here's my take, as a Romanian developer (since 2004ish).

One day I got a letter from the national authority regarding personal data where I was asked to reply to 15 questions regarding a personal project of mine, invoking the GDPR. The sanctions for not complying within 5 days was an incremental fine of 600 euros PER DAY, until I complied. This letter was directed to me as a natural person (not even my company).

Another story: I had a publishing website with some ads on it. The moment full GDPR went into effect, some years ago, revenue instantly dropped by 30% because the cookie banner I was using wasn't part of the approved european framework for cookie banners (they created an entire organization for this, called IAB). Most of the "approved" cookie banners are insanely overengineered nonsense and almost all of them cost a lot of money. And they kill your performance metrics. And when I finally gave in and implemented one of those, revenues dropped even more because I was losing readers who just quit without consenting at all.

Third and final anecdote: at one point I was contracted by a Romanian DTH television company who mostly operated with prepaid customers. According to GDPR, they were supposed to anonymize data they no longer needed, but because their clients were seasonal or less predictable, that turned out to be ridiculously hard. Their legal department, together with external contractors such as us ended up spending months to adjust their systems to conform to GDPR, and the result was their losing business and time, while being unable to properly serve older customers because they could no longer identify them.

So in my opinion, despite originally being well intended, GDPR opened a huge can of worms, created a lot of issues and made everyone's life harder on the internet, for no real benefit. On the contrary, the large companies could afford the legal counseling that they needed, but the smaller ones were hit hardest.
by GuB-42 | 2025-11-20 17:16:05+00:00
Yes, that's what I meant by companies doing this to cover their asses, but then again, why should presumably independent researchers be so scared of that to the point of not even releasing a mild working example.

Furthermore, using poetry as a jailbreak technique is very obvious, and if you blame a LLM for responding to such an obvious jailbreak, you may as well blame Photoshop for letting people make porn fakes. It is very clear that the intent comes from the user, not from the tool. I understand why companies want to avoid that, I just don't think it is that big a deal. Public opinion may differ though.
by max002 | 2025-11-20 17:16:11+00:00
Cant help myself and compare to frameworks, libraries and oop... cant we built so fast because of them?

I think of wrapper more as a very thin layer around. Thin layer is easy to reproduce. I do not question that a smart collection of wrappers can do great product. Its all about idea :)

However its if ones idea is based purely on wrappers there's really no moat, nothing stopping somebody else to copy it within a moment